= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shminux comments on Can we decrease the risk of worse-than-death outcomes following brain preservation? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (31)
Easy, if you are worried about worse-than-death life after revival, don't get preserved. It's not like there are too few people in the world and no way to create more. I'll take my chances, if I can. I don't expect it to be a problem to self-terminate later, should I want to. I don't put any stock in the scary scenarios where an evil Omega tortures a gazillion of my revived clones for eternity.
Well, this is certainly a reasonable response. But if there is a mechanism to decrease the probability that a worse-than-death outcome would occur so that people who had expressed these concerns are more likely to want to do brain preservation and more people could be a part of the future, that seems like an easy win. I don't think people are particularly fungible.
Could you elaborate on this? I'd be curious to hear your reasoning.
Does "don't put any stock" mean P(x) = 0? 0.01? 1e-10?
It means the noise level, down there with Pascal's Wager/Mugger and fairy tales coming true. Assigning a number to it would mean giving in to Pascal's Mugging.