X-Message-Number: 32887
From: "John de Rivaz" <>
References: <>
Subject: Re: Duplicates - who gets the bank account
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:36:12 +0100


"Who gets the bank account" is an insoluble problem, just like trying to get an 
answer to "Do you enjoy beating your wife - yes or no" is an unanswerable 
question if the witness is compelled to tell the whole truth. All this really 
shows is that the logic behind the legal profession is incapable of solving some
problems, as the divorce courts so ably demonstrate every day. In many ways, 
the divorce court has a very similar problem - they try to put the parties in 
the same position as if the marriage had not broken up -- clearly impossible. 
[The alternative of putting them in the same position as if it had not taken 
place is easy enough to work out, but for some reason best known to legislatures
this is not used. A possible explanation that may occur to readers of this list
is that it cannot yet include reversing the ageing that took place during the 
failed marriage, but as both people aged equally this may be a weak 
explanation.]


Another way of looking at problems is the religious way -- someone (preferably 
dead so they cannot be questioned) gets a revelation from God (whoever or 
whatever that is) and loads of followers down the ages who use this to try and 
lead exemplary lives. Sometimes people add to these revelations by having their 
own as well and linking them in - this works if they are believed, but many are 
not. I am not aware of religion providing a solution to the duplicates problem 
any better than the legal profession. Their answer to the divorce problem was to
ban it, or at least make it very difficult. Probably this is how they would 
deal with the problem of duplicating people.


That leaves us with science - repeatable observations or experiments. But all we
can do are "thought experiments". These are a bit more liberal than either law 
or religion, but they don't prove much. 


One way one might look at it is via the idea of feedback. If you tell someone 
how negative feedback improves the quality of the information coming out of an 
amplifier [send the signal through the amplifier and then subtract the 
difference between the input and the output divided by the gain, ie the error 
and feed that back to subtract from the input] that may well conclude that you 
are mad. It seems like going back through time to correct a mistake in life. 
Nevertheless it works if you get it right. If you conclude that people are 
ultimately information -- which is clearly what uploading and duplication does, 
then feedback considerations apply. The duplicates will conspire together 
against the duplicator to stop more being made. A time must come when the 
duplicator would be overwhelmed, leaving a finite number of duplicates. Come to 
think of it, I think this is the plot of a film or TV series, but can't recall 
the title.

-- 
Sincerely, John de Rivaz:  http://John.deRivaz.com for websites including
Cryonics Europe, Longevity Report, The Venturists, Porthtowan, Alec Harley
Reeves - inventor, Arthur Bowker - potter, de Rivaz genealogy,  Nomad .. and
more

 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32887