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