X-Message-Number: 24878 Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:00:32 -0700 From: James Swayze <> Subject: Re: Distributive backups References: <> > > >Message #24870 >From: "Michael C Price" <> >References: <> >Subject: Immortalism vs. Life Extensionism >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:58:58 +0100 > > > <snippage> >>> Whatever can go wrong >>> will go wrong -- especially when there is Eternity. >>> Things can go right a million million times, but things >>> only need go wrong once to obliterate you forever. >> >> > >Not if you're distributively and continuously backed up >in real-time across multiple basement universes. Or if >you believe that your identity at an earlier time can be >shared, to some extent, amongst backups/ duplicates >at a later time. > Michael, Suppose in some weird 'other universe', people have developed the practice of making clones of themselves then using some esoteric science rewiring their neuronal patterns to match that of the original cell donor and these for them are their backups. They then put them in suspension and leave many hundreds scattered all over the galaxy for insurance against their untimely demise. The clones are grown ahead of time so the time needed to grow them is not critical upon need. Forgive for sake of argument for the moment the notion that overwriting whatever pattern that existed would be tantamount to murder. [The Raelian scenario would be murder] Question 1. Do these clones, to you, have human rights? Question 2. If they do is it not a form of slavery to subject them to such use in the first place? Question 3. If it is a form of slavery is it not even more unfair to not allow them, let's call it, *runtime* rather than being forced into some limbo-esque nether existence? I think you can get where I'm coming from by my use of "runtime". Back in our universe do proposed mind backups have rights? If they do then don't they deserve to be conscious? Of course that defeats the purpose because I think you'll agree they would immedately diverge and become different people. Now let's suppose that they don't have full human rights and we treat them as intellectual property. A few questions further come to mind. Do patent rights then apply with all the baggage allegedly heaped upon them in some circles? If they have no rights then couldn't one duplicate ones own mind then license that software to work for you thereby doubling, trebling, quadrupling, etc., etc., one' intellectual productive ability? Now consider if this is possible, what happens if your patent runs out and big business can duplicate your mind workers ad infinitum and put you and a lot of others out of work? This subject came up on MURG and I got accused of having luddite notions when I suggested caution needed to be taken not to allow the job loss worker replacement scenario to run amok. The individual objecting insisted that duplicating such minds and working them would be against their human rights. He didn't see the obvious irony of creating them in the first place for the express purpose of being one's property to only lay around unconscious waiting for one's need to arrive, might be a form of slavery or abuse or violation of their human rights. I think when we put flesh on them it changes the dynamic. James -- Membership in order of joining - all comments on any subject are solely my opinion only and not reflective of the official positions of the following: Cryonics Institute of Michigan http://www.cryonics.org The Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org/info.html The Society for Venturism http://www.venturist.org Immortality Institute http://www.imminst.org Methuselah Foundation http://www.methuselahfoundation.org Methuselah Mouse Prize http://www.methuselahmouse.org [Give $$$ for life!] World Transhumanist Assoc. http://www.transhumanism.org/ WTA Portland Chapter http://home.comcast.net/~swayzej/pdxwta.html MY WEBSITE: http://home.comcast.net/~swayzej/jspage_main.html Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=24878