<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
<br>
Hi Adrian,<br>
<br>
This sounds like a very interesting and beneficial Project. For
the past 4 or 5 years I've been working on a survey project to
survey the worlds best experts about how consciousness works.
I've been attending conferences on consciousness and interviewing
experts, and integrating all of their best ideas on consciousness
into the open survey being collaboratively developed by all at
Canonizer.com.<br>
<br>
My personal interest in this is precisely because I want to know
what the best expert theories are, and what the leading theories
are predict will be possible with uploading, most importantly,
what will or could it be subjectively like to be uploaded to a
much more capable system.<br>
<br>
So far, about 50 people have participated in integrating their
theories into the survey, already including diverse people like
Daniel Dennett (<a href="http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/21">http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/21</a>),
Steven Lehar (<a href="http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/17">http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/17</a>),
David Chalmers (<a href="http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/8">http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/8</a>),
and a growing number of others. There is also a growing number of
supporters of each of their respective camps. As more experts
participate in the survey, it's ability to provide a real time
measure of expert consensus, about each of the concisely stated
leading theories being developed, will continue to improve, in a
horse race kind of way. Everyone can watch this and be educated
by it, as we approach the demonstrable science that will surely
soon falsify all but the one true camp. By definition, everyone
will definitively know how close we are, as the leading experts
start to abandon the various competing theories, and converge on
the one theory that works. At least one camp has already been
falsified by the data coming out of the large hadron collider.
Currently there are about 3 leading theories with the most
consensus, and lots of 'noise' camps (due to the fact that nothing
is censored on the way in) which can be easily ignored.<br>
<br>
The surprising thing is how much consensus has been achieved with
the consensus building system, despite the diversity of experts
already participating. The near unanimous emerging consensus is
so far focusing arround what the experts have now agreed to call
"Representational Qualia Theory" (<a
href="http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/6">http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/6</a>).
This is the basic idea predicting that a redness quality, is not a
quality of the strawberry, but instead, is a quality of our
knowledge of the strawberry or a property of the final result of
the perception process. The only disagreement seems to be about
the nature of the relationship between such qualities we can
experience, and the underlying neural correlates responsible for
them. So far, the leading Neck and Neck camps are Chalmer's
"Functional Property Dualism" which is predicting the relationship
is Functional, and Hameroff's "Material Property Dualism" which is
predicting the qualities are a quality of some material stuff, and
without the right material, no redness quality experience.
Obviously, each of these are very falsifiable, and it's only a
matter of time before the experimental neural scientist
demonstrate which one is the true theory, to the falsification of
all others.<br>
<br>
Given this theory the experts seem to so far near unanimously
agree on, there is a conscious world in our head, which is our
knowledge of the world we are consciously aware of, through it via
our senses. At the center of this conscious world, is our
knowledge of our "self", which unlike most of the rest of our
knowledge of the world, doesn't have a referent in realty.
However, despite this lack of a referent in reality, it and it's
continuity is still something that is very real, and important to
what we are and how we might want to be uploaded.<br>
<br>
The consensus seems to be predicting that we will be able to
create significantly expanded and diverse phenomenal conscious
worlds on artificial platforms, and consciously merge these worlds
of knowledge (via effing of the ineffable techniques being
predicted by the various different theories) with the worlds
currently being produced by our brains. With that, our knowledge
of our self spirit, even though it doesn't have a referent in
reality, well be able to traverse back and forth between these two
conscious worlds (the one currently in our bran, and the expanded
and consciously connected one running on the greatly enhanced
artificial platform.) much like an out of body experience.<br>
<br>
I've written a short story narrative describing exactly what these
theories are predicting will be possible and what it could
consciously be like for us. It is contained in Chapers 5 and 6 of
the short story entitled "1229 Years After Titanic" <a
href="http://home.comcast.net/%7Ebrent.allsop/1229.htm#_Toc22030742">http://home.comcast.net/~brent.allsop/1229.htm#_Toc22030742</a>.
It's still kind of crude, but if you are interested I'd love to
know your thoughts of any of it.<br>
<br>
Most people are afraid of uploading, because they think there will
be no possible continuity between one's self and the upload, and
no way of knowing if that upload is the same as the real me. But
the leading theories are now predicting that this need not be the
case. The prediction is that people's knowledge of themselves,
their knowledge of their 'spirits' if you will, will be able to
represented as if we are having an "out of body experience" as we
move from one platform to another, much like is roughly portrayed
in the movie Avatar. I think getting people to understand this
kind of stuff, will definitely get them interested in
understanding what will be possible. The result being people
loosing all fears of being uploaded that so many still struggle
with.<br>
<br>
If any sales brochure could communicate that, it would surely be a
great success at motivating people to push towards uploading, and
the singularity.<br>
<br>
Anyway, that's just how things currently appear to me. I'd love
to follow what you are working on, and see any results you end up
with, as I am keenly interested in all such!<br>
<br>
Upwards,<br>
<br>
Brent Allsop<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 4/21/2013 12:56 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALAdGNTKA=+acwWJoXkPZSVQQZTSTTg3Gc0OgeK4WMa_BBH=xA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:59 PM,
Alan Grimes <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ALONZOTG@verizon.net" target="_blank">ALONZOTG@verizon.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I want
to cover the subject of what it will actually be like to
be an upload in extreme detail, accuracy, and honesty. To
that end, I need to brush up on what the current claims
are as to why it should be so great and, in the greatest
possible detail, how it will work.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>One scene you could do: have an upload come across a
former<br>
chassis, possibly interleaved with memories of its
destruction.<br>
"I was killed...but I know who did it and exactly how. In
theory,<br>
I can visit the same death upon them The difference?
They<br>
can't come back."<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Bonus points if this wasn't the
original biological chassis, the<br>
death of which spurred the upload, but just another drone body
-<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">and if this has happened before, so the
protagonist has already<br>
wrestled with the question of revenge.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">As to the day to day operation, I'd
suggest analogs to disabled<br>
people where the host is less capable than a human body - and<br>
similar thoughts where the host is more capable. Either way,<br>
the upload is "living with" new limits in exactly the same way<br>
any normal human with a long term condition that impacts<br>
quality of life is "living with" it. (Lose an arm, and it'll
be a week<br>
until you get a replacement? You're one-handed for a week.<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Super-strong? You learn - quickly -
how to control it, so you're<br>
not wrecking your house; you almost certainly aren't still
having<br>
major accidents weeks later.)<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>