You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

khafra comments on Neuroimaging as alternative/supplement to cryonics? - Less Wrong Discussion

17 Post author: Wei_Dai 12 May 2012 11:26PM

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

Comments (68)

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

Comment author: khafra 14 May 2012 02:50:47PM *  4 points [-]

Wei_Dai wasn't saying there was. He was supposing that conventional brain scans produce data which is entangled with your particular brain; and that it's possible a sufficient number of such scans could enable a future superintelligence to reconstruct you to a sufficient level of fidelity. If FAI is coming but I buy the farm first, I would prefer lots of MRIs + a frozen brain to just a frozen brain; and I would prefer lots of MRIs to nothing at all.

edit: I do, of course, think the entangling is weak enough that 10GB of head MRIs << 10GB of mind state.

Comment author: Jack 14 May 2012 06:42:44PM 1 point [-]

Sure but these things cost money and we have finite resources. A dedicated fMRI machine would cost somewhere between 2-6 times SIAI's annual expenditures.

Comment author: khafra 14 May 2012 07:37:39PM 1 point [-]

That's a separate argument than the one over whether such a scan is possible with present technology. I do agree that an fMRI machine shouldn't be a budget priority for SI; I also do not consider it worth my money to get frequent MRIs (although I have saved the one I got for other reasons last year). If I were sufficiently wealthy, though, I'd buy frequent brain scans before I'd buy, say, a Ferrari (and I do really enjoy fast, flashy cars).

Comment author: Jack 14 May 2012 09:26:50PM *  1 point [-]

Such a scan isn't possible with present technology. What is possible are scans and other methods of recording information that could conceivably be relevant to an attempt to reconstruct your mind at a future time. If the argument is simply that brain scans "couldn't hurt"... well, 'duh'. But making a diary of your frequent thoughts or videotaping yourself as you go about your day couldn't hurt either. Knowing the regional blood-flow patterns in your brain in response to narrow and limited stimuli is not in a significantly different category.

The question is whether the cost and time involved in these endeavors is is better than plausible counter-factual spending. My point isn't just that SI shouldn't purchase a machine; it's that giving to existential risk research, or ensuring the financial stability of your cryonics organization probably has a better return for your own long-term survival than getting frequent fMRI scans does. The point that spending money on brain scans has a better return than an expenditure that probably lowers your long-term survival rate (due to car accidents) is not a strong argument.