[ExI] Human extinction

[Stefano Vaj]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 3:40 AM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>>  I am especially thinking of borderline scenarios, which are
>> usually useful to enlighten possible general rules. E.g., what
>> about an identity that is "reconstructed" or "emulated" with
>> growing and asymptotic accuracy, but where conflicting
>> rights might be claimed by the "creator" against those of
>> the "model"?
>
> Arghh!  What "rights"?  Sorry, but I really can't address that
> without making wild guesses as to what you might really be
> getting at. If we studiously avoid talking about "rights", the
> conversation will proceed much more effectively.

Agreed.

> You're possibly talking about a situation that would fall under
> "protection of private property" so far as I am concerned.
> This rule or tradition "protection of private" property is a
> principle that about 95% of the time provides guarantees
> that promote progress in modern societies (e.g. those following feudal
> Malthusian eras).

Fine. So the issue becomes: who is the proprietor of information
pertaining to an individual?

The individual? Should then the biographers and historians, as well as
the possible "uploaders" o "emulators", be barred from recording and
reconstructing it against the individual concerned's will? Or does the
information belong to those who invested in its collection, in which
case the person whose identity is backed-up or "redeveloped" in an
Omega-like computer should not be able to interfere with whatever its
owner might like to do with it.

> My answer, as usual, is "who pays"? Who is footing the bill?

This seems to imply that as long as no harm or cooperation is involved
from the side of the individual concerned, I should be left free to
backup the information defining someody's else identity, and do
whatever I like with it. In other words, if I have a button allowing
me to "copy" the whole mankind in the RAM of a Juppiter computer, it
is nobody's business if U decide to do it.

Stefano Vaj