/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11607380
Won’t work, but at this point it’s all we’ve got.

>>11607380
You would be a wretched, unhealthy, unfit specimen with poor genes and a toxic gut microbiome and abhorrent body odour and a bad complexion and all the other little things we take for granted, but which would make us repulsive to the more advanced humans of the future. If they actually advance.

>>11607380
You become dead before freezing in the cryochamber, so it seems like a 100% losing bet to me.

>>11607396
>he doesn't know about plastination

https://www.gwern.net/plastination

>>11607432
>legal death is the same thing as absolute death

>>11607432
>You become dead before freezing in the cryochamber

Ask yourself what it means to be dead.

If I magically stopped your heart right now, you would, in the immediate moment, be fine aside from being unconscious due to a lack of blood flow. We only call that dead because there is currently no way of restarting that heart and thus we label that person as a goner.

But then, if I could magically get that heart beating again in a minute or two, you'd get up again and continue on with your day. So not dead, truly.

What I'm saying is that you're not fully gone until there really is completely, entirely no possible way that you could ever be brought back. But bodies preserved in ice have not yet decayed. There is legitimately still some chance that we will find a way to resuscitate them.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/xCG6kXXmYwKCYHeif/if-mwi-is-correct-should-we-expect-to-experience-quantum

>I'm signed up for cryonics. I'm a bit worried about what happens to everyone else.

>Going on the basic anthropic assumption that we're trying to do a sum over conditional probabilities while eliminating Death events to get your anticipated future, then depending on to what degree causal continuity is required for personal identity, once someone's measure gets small enough, you might be able to simulate them and then insert a rescue experience for almost all of their subjective conditional probability. The trouble is if you die via a route that degrades the detail and complexity of your subjective experience before it gets small enough to be rescued, in which case you merge into a lot of other people with dying experiences indistinguishable from yours and only get rescued as a group. Furthermore, anyone with computing power can try to grab a share of your soul and not all of them may be what we would consider "nice", just like if we kindly rescued a Babyeater we wouldn't go on letting them eat babies. As the Doctor observes of this proposition in the Finale of the Ultimate Meta Mega Crossover, "Hell of a scary afterlife you got here, missy."

>The only actual recommendations that emerge from this set of assumptions seem to amount to:

>1) Sign up for cryonics. All of your subjective future will continue into quantum worlds that care enough to revive you, without regard for worlds where the cryonics organization went bankrupt or there was a nuclear war.

>>11607468
>2) If you can't be suspended, try to die only by routes that kill you very quickly with certainty, or (this is possibly better) kill almost all of your measure over a continuous period without degrading your processing power. In other words, the ideal disease has a quantum 50% probability of killing you while you sleep, but has no visible effects when you wake up, and finally kills you with certainty after a couple of months. Your soul's measure will be so small that almost all of its subjective quantity will at this point be in worlds simulated by whatever Tegmark Level IV parties have an interest in your soul, if you believe that's a good thing. If you don't think that's a good thing, try to die only by routes that kill you very quickly with certainty, so that it requires a violation of physical law rather than a quantum improbability to save you.

>3) In other words, sign up for cryonics.

Is Le Metabolic Privilege Man right?

>>11607380
What happens if the company you paid to freeze you goes bust before the technology to revive you is invented?

Cryogenic freezing seems like a zero risk business desu, it's not like your customers can sue you if it goes wrong.

>>11607463
>>11607447
synaptic connections start decaying after a couple of minutes without oxygen. those pretty much define who you are.

>>11607479
heard this on the radio recently. it's a good listen
https://www.thisamericanlife.org/354/mistakes-were-made

>>11607463
>all brain activity ceased
>all metabolic activity ceased
He's dead, Jim.

>>11607380
>one day
HHHHHHAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAH
NIGGA WE CAN DO THAT 2 DAY!

>>11607497
>implying damaged synaptic connections couldn't be fixed with nanotechnology

>>11607497
If the objective is just to recover the information to then digitalize your brain it doesn't matter if your connections are severed, it only matters if it's still visible where they were connected to.
That probably gives you more than two minutes.
An artificial brain can then be implanted on a biological body or in a simulated one in a virtual world.

>>11607497
Yeah but like, how much??

No doubt there will always be a little decay and you'll never come out spotless, but I don't think you'll lose your brain completely.

>>11608347
Will you shut the fuck up with your downloading brains bullshit? Why the FUCK is that a popular idea with people? You will never ever EVER be able to download yourself into a machine because if you did that you'd just be making a fucking copy of yourself meaning it wouldn't be you.