[ExI] Fwd: About your "Open Letter on Brain Preservation"

Giulio Prisco giulio at gmail.com
Mon May 24 07:00:58 UTC 2010


If chemical brain preservation is the best available means to preserve
brain structure for future uploading, then I am interested. I don't
think we will be confined to meat bodies forever, and so I find this
approach more interesting than cryonics. Preserve the brain chemically
now, wait a few decades or a couple of centuries for the development
of uploading tech, and leave the meatspace forever.

IF this works better than cryonics for this specific purpose of
uploading this IF is (to be determined), and since I am more
interested in uploading than in life in the meatspace, I would sign up
for chemical preservation of the brain now. This may be easier than
cryonics in both technical and regulatory terms.

G.

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:48 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/24/10, Bryan Bishop wrote:
>> In reality, this is a ponzie scheme by the formaldehyde consortium to
>>  undermine the market rates for their product. Okay, just kidding- I
>>  really have no idea why there's a fixation on.. er, this particular
>>  glycolation fixation.
>>
>>
>
> The obvious reason is that this field is what the originators of the
> petition are experts on.
>
> It comes from the Brain Preservation Foundation. This org has a very
> small web presence. It was set up by Ken Hayworth, John Smart, and
> several others.
>
> Ken Hayworth's research is described here:
> <http://singularityhub.com/2010/03/29/brain-preservation-technology-prize-a-modest-proposal-for-immortality-video/>
>
> Among other reasons chemical preservation is much cheaper than cryonics.
>
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list