X-Message-Number: 31261
From: Dan Hitt <>
Subject: gamble for preservation
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:36:53 -0500 (EST)

Hi All,

Alan's idea (that if insufficient funds are raised for somebody
needing cryopreservation then what funds exist be gambled) is
certainly logical.  In a way, it's reminiscent of cryonics itself.
(But only in a way: the success of cryonics itself involves
probability, but also our own work and the long sweep of history, as
Professor Ettinger likes to say.)

And furthermore, whether or not it has the approval of every
cryonicist, it can be implemented.  If the donors approve it is
certainly their freedom---moral and legal---to have what they donated
gambled.

However i would urge caution on two fronts:

(1) You should try to be very sure that you get the odds you are
paying for.  Mark's suggestion of Don Laughlin's Riverside Resort
might be fairest.  Casinos in general don't have a reputation for
being fair, and there might be steps in the process where persons
prejudiced against cryonics could make the gamble more likely to fail.

(2) There may be some negative feedback here that may lead to more
attempts to outlaw cryonics.  I don't know what form it would take,
but we certainly live in a world where "society" can and does
impose its will on us, even when our actions don't interfere
with anybody else's freedom.  (I'm not saying we should always
bow to pressure, or even that there will be pressure.  But we
should try to make rational decisions based on what we know
or think about reality.)

dan

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31261