[ExI] Perception of time was Wrestling with Embodiment

Keith Henson hkeithhenson at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 16:21:29 UTC 2012

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:00 AM,  "Natasha Vita-More"
<natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
> Hi Keith. Just a quick response to your first paragraph. And how do you
> define physical? In my view, atoms are physical even though I do not see
> them. Chemical charges are physical, even though I cannot see them. They
> have an encasement. And, yes, I am a materialist/functionalist, but not of
> the old school.
> Of course a human body, not matter how augmented, enhanced, morphed, etc.,
> is most definitely not the final aim. But if we are multiple selves existing
> in multiple enviorns, why oust this option? Choice.

I think we are failing to communicate here.  Let me try to generate an analogy.

Suppose you were only able to post here one day a year while everyone
else posted at least once a day.  It would be close to impossible to
communicate with the rest of the people on the list.

The problem with people uploaded into fast hardware where life went on
thousands to millions of times faster is that they would have an even
worse time communicating with people running at our usual rate.
Drexler talked about this in Engines of Creation 25 years ago, about a
million years of engineering being done in a year.

If you want to stay connected to the mainstream culture, and if that
culture accelerates substantially faster than what can be supported by
a human brain, you will be forced to give up slow bodies/brains and
move into a simulation.

This has awful consequences with respect to humans even spreading out
in the solar system, much less trying to go interstellar.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list