[ExI] Mind Uploading: is it still me?

[Ben Zaiboc]

On 25/12/2025 20:46, Keith Henson wrote:
> "repeated attempts made to create a functioning upload from it, until
> it works properly."
>
> Deleting a partially functioning upload would be equivalent to murder.
> I wrote about this decades ago in response to Hans Moravec's assertion
> that he could be revived from his writings.  How many millions would
> you have to create to get one "good enough"?
>
> In the story, a download was done on a body held in status by cold and
> nanomachines, and memory was updated from the experience of the
> uploaded mind.  I gave a lot of thought to the problems in the context
> of what we thought about nanotechnology 20 years ago.  But read "The
> Clinic Seed" and let me know if I missed anything.
> Keith
>
> Keith

"Deleting a partially functioning upload would be equivalent to murder." 
OK, maybe (and maybe not), but I think there are other approaches, if 
this is seen as unacceptable. I don't think that 'repeated attempts' 
necessarily implies deleting anything. Think, for example, along the 
lines of sketching out a model, testing it, and altering parts of it 
until they work as expected, then extending it, etc. Creating a model 
then deleting it if it doesn't work as expected is only one way of doing 
things, and if that seems morally wrong, or not desirable for other 
reasons, then other ways of doing things can be devised. This might be 
equivalent to guiding a developing child along certain lines, until they 
develop into an adult where the characteristics of the adult are already 
known. Or think of it as training, education, conditioning, programming, 
whatever makes you comfortable with the process. And don't forget that 
certain individuals might be quite happy with the 
'test-then-delete-if-not-satisfactory, until success' process. After 
all, it's their mind. Another approach would be to only create partial 
minds, or mental modules, one at a time, test them, then shelve them 
until enough have been created to stitch them together into a conscious 
mind. I'm sure there are plenty of other ideas too. "How many millions 
would you have to create to get one "good enough"? " I'd guess billions, 
rather than millions. But even so, that may not be infeasible. So 
imagine you get billions of variations of one mind, that can be tested 
against recorded historical facts, or stored scanned data. The variants 
could then go through a process of filtering, or competition, or 
merging, gradually refining them down to maybe a single most-feasible 
version. Nobody has to be 'murdered' in this process, it could be 
thought of as more like becoming more and more coherent. Again there 
will be other possible approaches, this is just something off the top of 
my head. Finally, I have a feeling that we tend to hand off too many 
things to a hand-wavey possible future technology that we put great 
store in. but seem to have great difficulty making real progress in: 
Nanotechnology. It might be useful to think of alternatives that might 
achieve some of the same ends. Will nanotech. really be essential for 
achieving uploading? I'm not so certain. I certainly think this is 
something worth considering. Don't misunderstand me, I'm as big a fan of 
the wonderful possibilites that nanotech. could make possible as 
anybody, I just think we shouldn't be blinded by this promise, and stop 
considering other possibilities, or put all our eggs in one basket.

-- 

Ben

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20251225/52fdeacd/attachment.htm>