X-Message-Number: 14948
From: "John de Rivaz" <>
References: <>
Subject: Re: Even closer?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 12:47:15 -0000

> If a backup could be made without damage to the original, I think it would
> be worthwhile.

Yes - seems like sound common sense to me.

However the problem arises if the backup behaves as though it is a reliable
reanimation of the original although in reality it isn't. Yet because of the
perception of the people in charge at the time a cryopreserved original is
considered no longer necessary and is dispersed.

This applies to the Fyodorov concept of universal reanimation - if as I
suspect computer programs (avatars) become commonplace where people *think*
they have reanimated their ancestors, they may not bother to do the real
thing (whatever that may be) as Fyodorov proposed.

--
Sincerely, John de Rivaz
my homepage links to Longevity Report, Fractal Report, music, Inventors'
report, an autobio and various other projects:
http://www.geocities.com/longevityrpt
http://www.autopsychoice.com - should you be able to chose autopsy?

----- Original Message ----- > Message #14945
> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:08:04 -0500
> From: david pizer <>
> Subject: Even closer?
> If a backup could be made without damage to the original, I think it would
> be worthwhile.  No one can know at this early stage, for sure, that the
> back up is, or is not, the original, so it would be worth doing.  I would
> do it, even though I have doubts that the backup is me.  What if I am
wrong?
>

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=14948