Are multiple uploads equivilant to extra life?

MileyCyrus

Suppose I have choice between the following:

A) One simulation of me is run for me 100 years, before being deleted.

B) Two identical simulations of me are run for 100 years, before being deleted.

Is the second choice preferable to the first? Should I be willing to pay more to have multiple copies of me simulated, even if those copies will have the exact same experiences?

Forgive me if this question has been answered before. I have Googled to no avail.

Suppose I have choice between the following:

A) One simulation of me is run for me 100 years, before being deleted.

B) Two identical simulations of me are run for 100 years, before being deleted.

Is the second choice preferable to the first? Should I be willing to pay more to have multiple copies of me simulated, even if those copies will have the exact same experiences?

Forgive me if this question has been answered before. I have Googled to no avail.

I agree that type-1 and type-2 systems are both possible.

A number of hypotheses that I would label "strong AI" don't claim that type-2 systems are impossible, they merely claim that type-1 systems can be constructed by means other than gestating a zygote. (That said, I don't think it matters much what we attach the label "strong AI" to.)

Re: your question... it's probably worth saying that I don't believe that it's possible in practice to construct a classic Chinese Room (that is, one in which the rules for how to respond to inputs are entirely captured as instructions that a human, or a group of humans, can successfully execute) that can emulate a person. Or simulate one, for that matter.

But OK, for the sake of answering your question, I will hypothetically assume that I'm wrong, and someone has done so to build TheChineseDave, and that I am convinced that TheChineseDave is a person.

Yes, in that hypothetical scenario, I would feel that sending all the people inside home and ending the experiment would constitute killing a person. (Or perhaps suspending that person's life, if it is possible to pick up TheChineseDave where it left off, which it seems like it ought to be.)

Also, as specified I would probably consider it an ethical killing, since TheChineseDave's continued existence depends on, but does not justify, the involuntary labor of the people inside the room. But I suspect that's beside your point.

Yes, in that hypothetical scenario, I would feel that sending all the people inside home and ending the experiment would constitute killing a person. (Or perhaps suspending that person's life, if it is possible to pick up TheChineseDave where it left off, which it seems like it ought to be.)

I think the moral component of emulation and how we get there needs to be explored. I may think killing an 18 year old genius is ethical if he dies incidental to my saving 700 lives on a crashing airliner in some easy to construct hypothetical. But the point is his... (read more)

0mwengler14y

I thought the value of the strong AI hypothesis was that you didn't have to wonder if you had created true consciousness or just a simulation of consciousness. That the essence of the consciousness was somehow built in to the patterns of the consciousness no matter how they were instantiated, once you saw those patterns working you knew you had a consciousness. Your weaker version doesn't have that advantage. If all I know is something that does everything a consciousness does MIGHT be a consciousness, then I am still left with the burden of figuring out how to distinguish real consciousnesses from simulations of consciousnesses. An underappreciated aspect of these issues is the red herring thrown in by some students of the philosophy of science. Science rightly says about ALMOST everything: "if it looks like a duck and it sounds like a duck and it feels like a duck and it tastes like a duck, and it nourishes me when I eat it, then it is a duck." But consciousness is different. From the point of view of a dictatorial leader, it is not different. If dictator can build a clone army and/or a clone workforce, what would he possibly care if they are truly conscious or not or only simulations of consciousness? It is only sombody who believes we should treat consciousnesses differently than we treat uncsonclous objects.