<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/10/2025 20:46, Keith Henson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPiwVB7r4QM-GLmBeMa0NrqFbC1aqmJDO13A0pYLXkSaf5H0sw@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Ben, I don't think you have thought it through.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Almost certainly not! Thinking it through is what we're doing here,
in this distributed brain we call Exi-Chat.<span
style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPiwVB7r4QM-GLmBeMa0NrqFbC1aqmJDO13A0pYLXkSaf5H0sw@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Technology to upload should permit memory updating in a biological
brain. </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't see that uploading necessarily implies this. It seems a much
harder problem, and might not be possible at all without redesigning
the brain, then rebuilding it, at which point we're probably not
talking about biology any more, making it pretty pointless.<br>
<br>
Besides which, there very well might not be any brain left to
update, after uploading. I suspect that destructive scanning will
always be easier and quicker than non-destructive scanning, and
developed sooner.<br>
<br>
A synthetic body and brain, sure. In fact I think it could be a
standard feature of uploading. Instead of uploading to a server
somewhere, together with millions of other minds, you could be
uploaded to your own private server, residing in a synthetic body,
with the ability to communicate with millions of other minds, build
shared virtual spaces, etc., as well as act in the physical world.<br>
<br>
Or even both, with a mind in a shared server, and another mind in a
synth. body, updating each other. Or more than two. Mental RAIDs!<br>
<br>
(By 'synthetic', I don't mean metal and plastic etc., I mean a
technology that we don't yet have, that goes beyond biology. Some
form of nanotech., almost certainly)<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPiwVB7r4QM-GLmBeMa0NrqFbC1aqmJDO13A0pYLXkSaf5H0sw@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Which means you can upload for a weekend and resume being a
meat human on Monday. The only limit that might be imposed is a "one
at a time" rule for practical physical reasons
If AI clinics like the one in The Clinic Seed become common, I don't
see how religious or authoritarian regimes can do anything about
people uploading.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Only if the authoritarian regimes (which includes religious ones)
lose their power over their subjects, which would mean they don't
exist any more.<br>
And don't forget that one form of power over people is the ability
to persuade (as opposed to coerce) them that they do or don't want
to do particular things.<br>
Certain current regimes seem to be pretty good at that.<br>
<br>
The 'Clinic Seed' style of uploading availability is only one
possibility (and to be honest, probably not the most likely). There
are many other models that have been thought of, and more that
haven't. Different models would probably suit different places as
well (how would you adapt the Clinic Seed concept for use in an
urban setting in, say, communist China? London? Nairobi?).<br>
<br>
But there's probably not much point speculating, because we're
talking about singularity territory. Fun as it might be, any
speculation is almost certainly bound to be wrong.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPiwVB7r4QM-GLmBeMa0NrqFbC1aqmJDO13A0pYLXkSaf5H0sw@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">On Sat, Oct 4, 2025 at 3:23 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org"><extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
On 04/10/2025 04:00, Keith Henson wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Uploaded humans living in private spaces don't have to agree on
anything. Their simulated world can be anything they like, including
simulated slaves to beat. Not my ideal world, but I am sure there
will be some who want it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Uploading only solves the problem for people who want to and can upload
(and have control of their simulations).
I expect it would be very likely that there will be plenty of people who
want to subjugate 'real' people, in the 'real' world, and would reject
uploading, as well as plenty of people who are prevented from uploading
(like everyone in all the autocratic and theocratic regimes for a start,
so several billion).
Some kind of consensus on the 'correct' (or even acceptable) values is
extremely unlikely.
The 'Universal declaration of human rights' is a lot less universal than
you might think, for example. Article 2* in particular is simply false,
if you take it as stating a fact rather than expressing an aspiration.
Certainly many, if not most, nations disagree with it in practice. And
apart from anything else, 'Freedom to upload' isn't in it, of course.
I'm now wondering if even some western nations might not enact
legislation to outlaw uploading, once it becomes possible. It wouldn't
surprise me, there are plenty of people who regard it as tantamount to
suicide, even among people who regard themselves as transhumanists or
materialists. It wouldn't be hard for a government to conclude that it
should be illegal (or that uploads don't count as human, and don't have
any rights** at all). Look at how most governments responded to
cryptocurrencies. If anything threatens their control, they will oppose
it. This is just as true of liberal democracies as it is of all the
other forms of government, the main advantage of democracies is that
they change quicker and with less disruption than more traditional
dictatorships.
Voluntary agreement on a single set of values to cover all humans is not
just unlikely, it's probably impossible (just another reason why
Yudkowsky's book is wrong).
--
Ben
* "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour,
sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction
shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or
international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under
any other limitation of sovereignty"
** I don't remember who it was that pointed out that your rights only extend as far as your ability to enforce them.
Ben
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Ben</pre>
</body>
</html>