a_gramsci comments on Biointelligence Explosion - Less Wrong

2 Post author: Dr_Manhattan 07 November 2011 02:05PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (16)

Comments (16)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: timtyler 07 November 2011 04:41:23PM *  8 points [-]

Despite this witches' brew of new technologies, a conceptual gulf remains in the futurist community between those who imagine human destiny, if any, lies in digital computers and hypothetical artificial consciousness; and in contrast radical bioconservatives who believe that our posthuman successors will also be our supersentient descendants at their neural networked core - not the digital zombies of symbolic AI run on classical serial computers.

Digital creatures need not be "zombies" - any more than human beings are - and they certainly don't need to run on "classical serial computers".

There is a gulf much like the one David describes - but the "bioconservative" position seems unbelievable to me - the future will be engineered.

Comment author: a_gramsci 08 November 2011 08:22:34PM 2 points [-]

Random question that just occurred to me: would you be fine if an exact copy was made of you (ignore quantum mechanics for now), and the old you was killed off?

Comment author: lessdazed 10 November 2011 04:39:51PM 3 points [-]

If you asked me afterwards, I'd hardly say "no".

Comment author: timtyler 08 November 2011 10:30:28PM 0 points [-]

Me? I suppose so - if I could be really convinced the process was reliable. Make two of me and I might need less convincing.

Comment author: a_gramsci 09 November 2011 02:18:11AM -2 points [-]

I don't know. The question of self is a hard one. I would not, because I would like my consciousness, as in the one that I control (a little recursive, but you get the point) to be alive, and because that other me is another distinct set of atoms, and therefore my neurons don't control him. So I would say no

Comment author: [deleted] 10 November 2011 05:04:22PM 0 points [-]

There might not be such a thing as "distinct set of atoms" on fundamental level and even if it does, the atoms/molecules in constellation that constitutes you are turned over all the time. In short you in 5 sec do not consist of the same set of atoms at present you. Does that make you think that 5 sec you is not really you?

Comment author: wedrifid 10 November 2011 06:09:16PM 1 point [-]

In short you in 5 sec do not consist of the same set of atoms at present you. Does that make you think that 5 sec you is not really you?

The five seconds in the future guy is me. The guy from 5 seconds ago... nah, he was kind of a dick.

Comment author: Burrzz 12 November 2011 10:49:49AM 0 points [-]

Could I come back at say 21 with the knowledge / wisdom I have now?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit