Bart119 comments on Far negatives of cryonics? - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Bart119 01 June 2012 06:43PM

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

Comments (25)

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

Comment author: buybuydandavis 02 June 2012 12:21:38AM 0 points [-]

If there is a big enough change in the species, I can see you being revived for experimental purposes.

If a theocratic state wanted to torture the infidels, I don't see how being a human popsicle is going to make the situation any worse.

But that the dread of something after death,— The undiscover’d country, from whose bourn No traveller returns,—puzzles the will, And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of?

Comment author: Bart119 02 June 2012 01:43:40AM 0 points [-]

The idea is that everyone who wasn't frozen got a chance to see it coming and convert, maybe two or three times as winds shifted?

Comment author: buybuydandavis 03 June 2012 12:31:28AM 0 points [-]

Or maybe the frozen people won't have let their opinions slip as the winds shifted. They'll see the theocratic takeover as a fait accompli, won't be on the record as opposing it, and so will be able to declare their allegiance to the Great Ju Ju and avoid torture altogether.

Or maybe, being from the past will confer a special honor and status with the Great Ju Ju, so that it will be extra wonderful to be a thawed human popsicle.

We can play outlandish maybes til the cows come home. Averaging over my probabilities for all hypothetical futures, I'd rather be alive than not 500 years from now.

Too many arguments in the world of the form "but what if Horrible Scenario occurs?" If Horrible Scenario occurs, I'll be fucked. That's the answer. Can't deny it. But unless you have information to share that significantly increases my probabilities for Horrible Scenarios, merely identifying bad things that could happen is neither a productive nor a fun game.

Comment author: Bart119 03 June 2012 08:28:19PM 0 points [-]

The initial question was just meant to open the issue of future negatives, and having gotten some feedback on how the issue had been discussed before, I gave the bulk of my thoughts in a reply to my initial post.

What I consider much more realistic possibilities (more realistic than benign, enlightened resurrection) are being revived with little regard to brain damage and to serve the needs of an elite. I laid it out in my other response in this thread (I don't know how to link to a particular comment in a thread, but search for 'When I started this thread'.)