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.

Username comments on Brief response to kalla724 on preserving personal identity with vitrification - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: Synaptic 16 June 2012 01:28AM

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

Comments (32)

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

Comment author: Username 17 June 2012 03:08:36PM 0 points [-]

you now should prefer to self modify to be the kind of person who does care about Everett branches descended from this one in which you no longer exist, since that gives better expected results (from your current perspective).

Makes sense, thanks for articulating it. This is the reason I don't consider quantum suicide (via cryonics) a reasonable position until a normal end of life situation.

And without using cryonics, quantum suicide has the potential to be a very bad experience. Cryonics is a rather all-or-nothing approach, which is good in that it reduces the very large middle ground where I survive but with 40% brain function. (As noted in Valdimir_Nesov's link)

Comment author: wedrifid 17 June 2012 03:41:53PM *  0 points [-]

This is the reason I don't consider quantum suicide (via cryonics) a reasonable position until a normal end of life situation.

I'm not sure where the cryonics/quantum suicide link is coming from. Do you just mean 'cryonics' in the sense "use something to make the patient clearly unconscious and then either wake them up or destroy them"? (As opposed to any long-term-storage connotations.)

(As noted in Valdimir_Nesov's link)

I'm a fan of that link for some reason.

Comment author: Username 18 June 2012 12:04:12AM *  0 points [-]

Yes. Cryonics being preferred over other methods because it's a viable method for survival in the linear time case as well.