“Famously, Einstein defended determinism, but more recently the popular science communicator Neil deGrasse Tyson has said”
—Hard to take you seriously if you're going to discuss arguably the greatest scientist of all time and a fat charlatan as if they are equals. But then, is anyone serious supposed to take this stuff seriously?
The technology for successive life cycles already exists, as a two-part process. First, we use biobanks to freeze a whole blood sample at <-137C, which grants us a time machine good for centuries of unaltered stability. Now a retail product at most biobanks (~$100 yr) - it is a mature technology.
Second, we can then regenerate ourselves via ectogenesis (artificial womb) at any time - the same SCNT tech that produced Dolly the sheep in 1996. Not yet mature, ectogenesis has been successfully implemented, routinely for dogs, horses and recently for macaque monkeys (primates!)..
So why isn't this being examined? Because 'science' has decided that our Self lies within the brain instead of our DNA, that cloning isn't cool since Hitler, it's just taboo. How do I know it works? In ectogenesis exactly one molecule of your DNA is gestated as a human infant. There is existential CONTINUITY.
This means that your phenotype, which is your human franchise, has never been extinguished, and you can repeat this process for a few centuries before we have to confront AGI as a species. See my white paper on this at https://humanism.substack.com/p/genity-whitepaper - Dwight
The “ethical” problems that you mention belong in the category of ethical problems that is nice to have, if you ask me. Overpopulation? Let’s colonize the galaxy and beyond, for f#’s sake, we should do so anyway.
You have a wrong link for “Mind Files,” please check, I guess you intended to link to Martine Rothblatt’s writings.
I think starting with biomedical advances is misleading, because this has nothing to do with biomedical tech. 3D bio printing is but one of many possible ways to reinstantiate a mind from the past. For example, I would find an afterlife as a pure software being living in a virtual world with my good friends perfectly OK.
Of course if the universe is a fully deterministic (and reversible) process all information about the past still exists in the present. It is scrambled, but unscrambling it is merely a tech problem, nothing that a super advanced civilization couldn’t do. But you don’t need full conservation of information for QA, only the ability to retrieve enough and good enough information - I’m still myself after clipping a fingernail or without total recall of my 5th birthday party.
I think future ultra advanced sci/tech will enable some sort of time travel, or at least time scanning (archeology on steroids), for QA and technological resurrection.
Please continue studying these things thoroughly and include QA in the sequel to The Transhumanist Wager, which I believe you are writing. We, your readers, WANT ZOE BACh BACk!
“Famously, Einstein defended determinism, but more recently the popular science communicator Neil deGrasse Tyson has said”
—Hard to take you seriously if you're going to discuss arguably the greatest scientist of all time and a fat charlatan as if they are equals. But then, is anyone serious supposed to take this stuff seriously?
The technology for successive life cycles already exists, as a two-part process. First, we use biobanks to freeze a whole blood sample at <-137C, which grants us a time machine good for centuries of unaltered stability. Now a retail product at most biobanks (~$100 yr) - it is a mature technology.
Second, we can then regenerate ourselves via ectogenesis (artificial womb) at any time - the same SCNT tech that produced Dolly the sheep in 1996. Not yet mature, ectogenesis has been successfully implemented, routinely for dogs, horses and recently for macaque monkeys (primates!)..
So why isn't this being examined? Because 'science' has decided that our Self lies within the brain instead of our DNA, that cloning isn't cool since Hitler, it's just taboo. How do I know it works? In ectogenesis exactly one molecule of your DNA is gestated as a human infant. There is existential CONTINUITY.
This means that your phenotype, which is your human franchise, has never been extinguished, and you can repeat this process for a few centuries before we have to confront AGI as a species. See my white paper on this at https://humanism.substack.com/p/genity-whitepaper - Dwight
Hi Zoltan, nice essay.
The “ethical” problems that you mention belong in the category of ethical problems that is nice to have, if you ask me. Overpopulation? Let’s colonize the galaxy and beyond, for f#’s sake, we should do so anyway.
You have a wrong link for “Mind Files,” please check, I guess you intended to link to Martine Rothblatt’s writings.
I think starting with biomedical advances is misleading, because this has nothing to do with biomedical tech. 3D bio printing is but one of many possible ways to reinstantiate a mind from the past. For example, I would find an afterlife as a pure software being living in a virtual world with my good friends perfectly OK.
Of course if the universe is a fully deterministic (and reversible) process all information about the past still exists in the present. It is scrambled, but unscrambling it is merely a tech problem, nothing that a super advanced civilization couldn’t do. But you don’t need full conservation of information for QA, only the ability to retrieve enough and good enough information - I’m still myself after clipping a fingernail or without total recall of my 5th birthday party.
I think future ultra advanced sci/tech will enable some sort of time travel, or at least time scanning (archeology on steroids), for QA and technological resurrection.
Please continue studying these things thoroughly and include QA in the sequel to The Transhumanist Wager, which I believe you are writing. We, your readers, WANT ZOE BACh BACk!