[ExI] Uploaded property rights

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

>
> *> If your theory of identity can't be used to derive a workable set of
>> property rights laws, it's not much good for anything. *
>
>
> Both have a equally valid claim to be called Darin Sunley so regardless of
> who eventually gets to live in that house Darin Sunley will feel that
> justice has been achieved and Darin Sunley will feel that a profound
> injustice has been committed and Darin Sunley will be absolutely correct.
> If that seems weird well that's why it's called a Singularity.
>

### It's actually an interesting question, over and above philosophising
about the whichness of me-ness.

Let's say your enemies get a hold of your personal information and use it
to create a copy of you. The copy comes over into your house and says it's
his, too. What should the law say?

But let's say you made a copy of yourself voluntarily but then had a change
of heart, being creeped out like when you are watching yourself on video.
The copy says it's his house, you say it's your house. What should the law
say?

Or the wife says two of you is just too much for her and serves you both
papers. What should the law say? Who pays the alimony?

I would think that the law should pay attention to the parent-process
responsible for creating the copy-process. If a copy of you is made by your
enemies, they are to be held responsible for making that copy whole in
legal terms - such as giving him wealth equal to the wealth owned by the
original.

If you create a copy of you voluntarily, the law could say you also create
property rights for that copy. For example, depending on your beliefs
(which are by definition identical to the beliefs held by the copy), the
property might be split, or a coin could be thrown to decide which of yous
gets your money.

Or maybe it would be OK for the copy to own nothing and let the copy be
used as a slave by its original - after all, it would be you abusing
yourself, so it's nobody else's business.

But let's say a criminal on death row makes a copy of himself and says to
take a randomly selected one of him to the gas chamber. Should the law be
satisfied with gassing one or insist on gassing both?

Iain Banks, the religion-hater that he was, wrote about religious people
making copies of sinners and sending them to extreme torture in a
simulation of hell - is it OK to take vengeance on copies for the sins of
the originals? What should the law say?

Verily, uploading creates lots of fascinating questions for the
legally-inclined mind.

Any law worth of respect has to meet many constraints and must respond to a
very complicated social reality, so of course the philosophy of personal
identity is not a sufficient foundation to create the law of uploads.
Doubtless it will take multitudes of well-paid lawyers to create this law
as we bumble our way through the singularity.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200602/5d4a0b59/attachment.htm>