All of icebrand's Comments + Replies

Thanks for the information. Edited out. The main issue I had with the original comment was that it seemed to assume everyone would agree with a specific, vastly oversimplified definition of organic death. In reality organic death is a process that happens over a long period of time and has not happened completely by the time the brain reaches LN2 temperatures in ideal circumstances. It could easily be reversible via biological means.

Perhaps a different prefix would make it more clear that it is a formerly animate object, or between stages of being animate. E.g. postanimate or transanimate.

0sfb
More optimistically, pre-reanimated.

But the cells remain dead, as does the organ they comprise.

In the case of vitrification under ideal conditions this is not true of most of the cells. There is a spectrum of cryonics cases, and many of them do have a high rate of cell death, but the goal of cryonics is to prevent cell death to the greatest degree possible.

Death is a process, not an all or nothing proposition. You don't really need to assign a category "dead" or "not dead" to understand what's going on. The brain is broken beyond simple repair and ceases to be animate.... (read more)

1TheOtherDave
My problem with "broken" in this context is that it fails to distinguish between a brain that fails to function as intended in some important capacity -- for example, one that is incapable of identifying its person's wife -- and one that fails to function as intended in any capacity at all. I guess I can go with "inanimate," if you want (since you say "ceases to be animate"). It seems weird to fail to distinguish between a corpse and a statue, but not unbearably weird.
icebrand-20

Cryonics involves killing a brain (or preparing a dead brain) in such a way as to maximize the chances that some future technology can extract its instantiated mind.

[edit to take away the quibble about definitions]

Cryonics keeps open the possibilities both of uploading and robust repair scenarios. Assuming that it will play out one way or the other is unnecessarily specific for a belief about the future. There may be e.g. cultural or contractual reasons to repair people instead of extracting the information to instantiate on a digital substrate.

0orthonormal
Incidentally, I suspect that this was downvoted for starting an argument over definitions. (The downvotes weren't mine, FYI.)
2TheOtherDave
I haven't claimed that the person dies; I've claimed the brain does. Sure, perhaps future technology will include the ability to reconstruct the person from the dead cells of the person's brain, in which case the person survives... no argument. And in that case cryonics is, as you say, a form of survival. But the cells remain dead, as does the organ they comprise. And the comment I was responding to was talking about ways to allow a brain to survive without the body's blood flow, not about people. And, sure, it's possible that future technology will include the ability to reconstruct a living brain from the brain's dead cells. Actually, I suspect that will be much easier than reconstructing the person. And it's possible that it will include the ability to repair the cells themselves and restore them to their former state. Personally, I would say it's still a dead brain, much as my ability to reforge a broken sword doesn't prevent the sword from breaking. But that's a purely semantic question... the reality is the same whether we call the brain "dead" or not. So, OK, what term would you prefer I use? (Resting? Stunned? Pining for the fjords? Passed on? This brain is no more! It has ceased to be! It is an ex-brain!) Or do you object to using any terminology to differentiate a post-cryonics brain from a pre-the-event-that-ordinarily-entails-a-funeral brain?

Here is PureDoxyK's response to the Wozniak criticism. There's a funny bit...

  • There are no women doing polyphasic sleep. Which makes myself, my friend who first did Uberman with me, and my hero Heidi who’s gone more than a year-and-a-half on Uberman by now the most attractive, clean guys in HISTORY! Mind you, he doesn’t just state this silliness, but uses it as EVIDENCE for the fact that polyphasic sleep can’t work (because women’s “hormones” don’t allow it somehow). Yeah, ROFLcopter.
2jwhendy
Wow -- thanks for providing that link -- it was great to read her whole response and the comments. This is a fun reply, as I can say that: * I've spent the evening reading tons of posts from PureDoxyk and Steve Pavlina * I essentially retract everything I wrote above; I agree that Wozniak is heavy on rhetoric and short on data * I think PureDoxyk's posts, blog, and book show that even if she is only one data point... at least it's an empirical data point vs. Wozniak's speculation. * Given this... I'm going to try this myself! How's that for a rapid mind changing? I believe I was wrong and that even if Wozniak has a reasonable understanding of one method of proper sleep habits... this does nothing to rule out the testimony given by those who have adapted to polyphasic and state that they are energetic, alert, etc. on less sleep. I still have one lingering concern -- long term effects. PureDoxyk states that she is not aware of any long term data on polyphasic sleep. Lastly, PureDoxyk has a series of vlogs documenting her most recent adaptation to the Everyman schedule (3hr core + 3 naps of 20ish minutes). I watched the first and a couple others. The first has some great tips. There's also a google group with some helpful tips on getting ready for something like this.

Yes, plan A is definitely to wait as long as possible. :)

For me this is in the "not surprising, but important to notice" category. Every kind of activism is a kind of marketing. The branding of important topics like cryonics, rationality, transhumanism, etc. tends to suffer from neglect, or plays out in weird ways that will never go mainstream. This may be due to the way we tend to think about them or the kind of people attracted to them.

This is an amazing story. Congratulations on your courage and the chance you have with your mother which many others do not. Even if it is small it is a source of hope.

This is the first case I've heard of where brain only cryonics was combined with a traditional funeral. KrioRus is the only current cryonics company that does brain only right now, so it is possible that more such cases may originate there in the future.

If this does become public in Russia, we may be presented with a useful data point about how controversial brain-only cryonics is. My theory... (read more)

5turchin
The main point is that the body was legaly buried. By law the body is the skeleton, not the brain. If Criorus failed, I can take the brain home and keep it in the refrigiratoir. Even in US the brain is not covered by law and was many times removed without agreement with relatives. See e.g. A.Einstein brain history.

On the topic of scholarship, I'd like to mention that if one takes the notion of surviving cryopreservation seriously, it's probably a good idea to read up on cryobiology. Have at least a basic understanding of what's going to happen to your cells when your time comes. There is a rich and complex field behind it which very few individuals have much grasp on.

If the bug bites you to do so, you may even be able to go into the field and make some breakthroughs. Huge advances have been made in recent decades by very small numbers of cryonics-motivated scientist... (read more)

I'd be more than happy to debate any and all pragmatic concerns you can think of in another thread. Feel free to start one in Discussion. I'm not signed up yet, focusing largely on the advocacy side of things. As a younger adult it seems like advocacy has a higher potential payoff both in research getting done before my turn comes and having freedom and necessary infrastructure to get preserved under ideal circumstances. Currently it's very difficult to arrange an ideal preservation.

I'm not 100% libertarian, and try to see both sides. There is something to... (read more)

Cryonics has recently attracted a small but dedicated opposition who've adopted the framing that cryonics is a scam which consumers need protection from. (I won't link to them, but you can find them in any google search for the word "cryonics".) The basic issue seems to be that it matches their perception of a Scientology-like cult. They've been growing more active, so I wouldn't put it past them to try to push something through this year.

There was a bill specifically targeting cryonics proposed in 2004 in Arizona. Arguably the Ted Williams event... (read more)

3TheRev
I didn't actually realize cryonics was such a hot topic on this site until after I had posted, so I became a little worried that I'd get beaten with the newbie stick for it. I consider myself a transhumanist (in the sense that I find genetic alteration, computer augmentation, life extension, etc to be desirable goals, not in the sense that I drank the Kurzweil Kool-Aid and think that all this is inevitable or even probable in my lifetime), but I had never really considered cryonics as a major transhumanist approach. I'm certainly not opposed to cryonics on any kind of ethical grounds (my personal pragmatic concerns are a matter for another thread entirely), but since this is a question of the policy rather than the science side of cryonics, I have to go with my general observation that legislatures almost inevitably show up a day late and a dollar short. I think that the first wave of legislation on the topic will come at least one legislative session after the irrational masses start to get worked up into a religious frenzy over cryonics. So this is, to me, an issue better suited for decade rather than year predictions. I am however, compelled to agree with you that the likelihood of pro-cryonics legislation appears to be significantly less than the likelihood of anti-cryonics legislation. Hell, even if I weren't a transhumanist, the civil libertarian in me would be appalled by Michigan's facepalmingly bureaucratic handling of the situation. "Cryonics Institute is clearly operating as both a funeral establishment and cemetery without any state oversight." Do we really need a government permission slip to bury/freeze our dead? Also, why am I completely unsurprised by the fact that Arizona was the state to try and ban cryonics?

I hadn't thought of it specifically in terms of persuasive writing. But that's essentially what I want to do; persuade cryonics advocates to take more action, and persuade fence-sitters to become advocates. Perhaps reading some formal persuasive writing literature would be instructive to getting a more natural feel. But as you say it is likely to be more a matter of practice. My normal style is more explanatory than persuasive.

In 2011, a new law will be proposed in some jurisdiction which specifically: Restricts cryonics activity. 15%. Protects cryonics patients. 3%.

2gwern
1. restrict: http://predictionbook.com/predictions/2108 2. protect: http://predictionbook.com/predictions/2109
1TheRev
I think even these numbers are a little high, except for the fact that you didn't limit it by jurisdiction. Cryonics isn't hot right now, but longevity certainly is. I don't think there is enough attention on cryonics to justify legislation, but even if there were, the first steps of the legal battle would be court decisions rather than legislation.

For a potentially positive version of this, see my blog. I deliberately assume that the reader is an advocate of cryonics, despite an awareness that some (most?) potential readers are not already interested in advocating cryonics. My working assumption is that this will influence a substantial portion of fence-sitters to define themselves as cryonics advocates in order to resolve the cognitive dissonance -- more so than e.g. directly arguing that people should become cryonics advocates.

I wouldn't be doing this if I thought people are likely to become cryon... (read more)

5orthonormal
You'd never make it in Slytherin, sorry. To expand: your blog is what happens when a non-neurotypical person reads about a subtle trick routinely done by smart neurotypicals, then tries to emulate the trick as they consciously understand it. It doesn't come across as natural, and only hurts your cause (it's way too easy to make fun of; what it most reminds me of is the style of Stuff White People Like, and I don't think that's the tone you were aiming for). Unless you've had substantial practice with marketing or politics, you're better off telling it straight than consciously intending to manipulate people's biases (again, aside from the ethical issues involved).

Thank you for the reference, looks like a good book. I thought this part regarding motives for procrastination was interesting:

More recently, Sapadin and Maguire (1997) have also classified procrastinators into types: the "perfectionist" who dreads doing anything that is less than perfect, the "dreamer" who has great ideas but hates doing the details, the "worrier" who doesn't think things are right but fears that changes will make them worse, the "defier" who resists doing anything suggested or expected by someone

... (read more)
0[anonymous]
I note that making things like studying and exercising habits is not necessary to get them done regularly. It is possible to get these done by setting reminders for yourself, instead of making them habits. Making them habits may, of course, be a good idea.
pjeby240

More recently, Sapadin and Maguire (1997) have also classified procrastinators into types

It would be more accurate to say that these are classifications of types of procrastination patterns; I have personally done every single one of the behaviors described in the quote!

While I see your point for the most part, I wouldn't want to end my life rather than "suffer" 50 years of bliss prior to dying. The only horror there is the lack of economic productivity, human relationships, etc. in the meantime (which are also correlated with death) and the potentially high cost. I might prefer death over going deeply in debt or badly sapping social services (for reasons of pride), but if I was productive enough to save up all the necessary funding prior to the event I don't see why there is a problem with spending it on 50 fi... (read more)

0giambolvoe
I wasn't saying that everyone would agree with my analysis of every situation I gave, only that most people have a point at which they will decide life isn't worth [fill in the blank].