RomeoStevens comments on Cryonic resurrection - an ethical hypothetical - Less Wrong

10 Post author: ialdabaoth 25 November 2012 12:44AM

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

Comments (28)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 25 November 2012 06:01:42AM 5 points [-]

Assume that we haven't asked any of the subjects this question, so we do not know their own preferences.

Find terminally ill poor people and offer to make monetary compensation to their families to test revivification techniques on them.

Comment author: DataPacRat 25 November 2012 06:09:58PM 6 points [-]

... presumably at some point after lab-mice, lab-rats, lab-dogs, and lab-chimps have all been able to be revived fully successfully, as far as can be determined?

Comment author: RomeoStevens 25 November 2012 11:02:57PM 2 points [-]

Yes, that was assumed.

Comment author: ialdabaoth 25 November 2012 11:26:48PM 5 points [-]

That's an explicit assumption of the hypothetical - "The technology will not progress in refinement without practice, and practice requires actually restoring cryogenically frozen human brains." Suppose that the process requires a lot of recalibration between species, and tends to fail more for brains with more convolutions and synaptic density.