What if you die while teleporting and all it does is create a perfect clone?
>>27270805
what if every day your cells are dying and replacing themselves with clones? Not even perfect ones, mind you. What if the self is just an illusion designed by circumstance to keep you motivated to pass on your genes?
That'd be some pretty far out science fiction!
>>27270922
But the difference is the consciousness is continuous, and yes even while sleeping. It never really stops per se. Once you stop that, well then.
Maybe that clone will be happy
>>27270961
I'd say it stops during sleep.
>>27270922
This.
>>27270961
Continuity is irrelevant. There is no actual "self" to begin with. "Self" is an abstraction we use to reference the various different and often changing processes our brain generates in a way that treats them as a single, coherent thing for the sake of convenience.
That's not "what if" you dumb fucking nigger that is the case
EVERYONE IN STAR TREK IS FUCKING DEAD
>>27270805
What if you don't die, and then you have sex with your clone? That's not gay, right?
>>27270805
Then you guys will have twice the trouble on your hands! lol!
>>27271081
But it is continuous at least as far as our matter all being together for most of our lives. Besides our neurons don't really die off and change, they do but over a long enough time that they don't affect change. Plus, being ripped apart molecule by molecule is pretty much as close to dead as you can possibly get.
>>27270805
>what if you die
That only makes it better
>>27270805
that's how it works
but the theory is your consciousness is bound to the version of you that lives the longest
so it wouldn't even matter, you wouldn't notice a thing
Could the Enterprise do a kessel run in 12 parsecs ?
>>27270805
I cant believe cpg grey got 15g's for slapping his label on meme science. Also thats exactly what it does since it needs a complete scan down to the sub atomic. It just raises the ethical question of being and/or consciousness.
Also heres my fav vid on the subject: youtube(.)com/watch?v=pdxucpPq6Lc
Somebody's watched MinutePhysics' latest video.
>>>/reddit/
>>27271879
>I cant believe cpg grey got 15g's for slapping his label on meme science
huh?
>>27271156
I'm not even saying it isn't continuous. I'm saying it doesn't matter whether it's continuous or not. Brain processes being continuous vs. having breaks in them doesn't make the "self" real either way. That's why I hate that "it would only be a copy" argument that comes up whenever people discuss mind downloading. The mind is a program of the brain. There's no such thing as having a "real" program vs. only having a copy. It isn't a physical thing in the first place. It's a pattern of physical things. If you have the information on how to make the pattern happen, then you have the pattern. You can make a hundred versions of the 'you' pattern and none of them would be more or less legitimate than the rest.
>>27270805
Check out SOMA on Steam
That game pretty much tackles what you guys are discussing ITT
>>27272378
That game has the same bad "it's only a copy" idea as its premise.
>>27272393
Pretty accurate, sadly. Only grab during sale.
>>27270961
it stops when you pass out
>>27271963
Why do "you" experience the stream of consciousness of only one of the patterns?
>>27270805
Someone posted a thread about a similar idea regarding sleep on /x/ a few weeks ago and I panicked every night for weeks afterward, fuck you. I'm not sleeping tonight.
>>27270805
Well no shit, of course you die if the machine destroys your cells and recreates a copy of them somewhere else. Your copy wouldn't remember dying and live on perfectly fine and so would seem also to your family and everyone, but your currenr counsciousness will die and be copied onto the new you.
>>27271003
You can be conscious while sleeping tho
>>27272782
Okay what about being knocked out?
>>27271963
Hard problem of consciousness. All of you fuck's argument's boil down to that. Look it up.
>>27270805
I imagine teleporting would be some type of ultra-convenient commute for the rich elite and teleport hubs would be stocked with a bunch of artificially created bodies for those who register with the teleport company.
So depending on your subscription model you could opt to have like five clones of yourself ready and waiting in all major teleport hubs at all times. Since we already have wireless internet we could probably figure out how to transfer the contents of an entire brain eventually because that would still be easier than accelerating an actual body.
But it would be expensive as fuck and probably prone to hiccups, imagine you have to call the fucking Verizon customer service every time the LED on the teleport router starts flashing.
Or even worse, you're in the middle of teleporting when the transfer speed suddenly drops to 100kbits or something because some faggot decided to transfer ten people at once.
>>27272847
>Hard problem of consciousness
Not everyone accepts that there even is a hard problem of consciousness. And I happen to agree with the ones who don't (Daniel Dennett, Marvin Minsky, Douglas Hofstadter, etc.).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjbWr3ODbAo
>>27272882
> transfer speed suddenly drops to 100kbits or something because some faggot decided to transfer ten people at once
If your transporter client uses bittorrent then more your download speed would increase the more you seeded to others.
>>27273096
I think that consciousness might be a fundamental property of sufficiently organized networks. I do, however believe that it is a distinct phenomena separate from purely physical (material) causes.
>>27273096
I find that a lot of people who don't think there is a hard problem, don't truly understand the questions being asked. Not saying this is true for you, but just in my personal experience. We can obviously explain the human psyche through science. What we can't explain is the fundamental property of "experience" as opposed to raw existence
>>27273205
That's not too far away from what I think, which is the Daniel Dennett model where 'consciousness' is a fictional but useful abstraction in the same way 'center of gravity' is. Both are ways of conceptualizing situations with a common pattern that can be predicted fairly effectively when you make use of them e.g. knowing the center of gravity lets you know when to expect things to lose balance and fall over.
>>27273205
>I think that consciousness might be a fundamental property of sufficiently organized networks
That idea actually scares me a little, but I was never able to put into words what "consciousness" is supposed to be exactly and I like your way of phrasing it.
But that also means we need to keep our rooms in disarray lest they kill us in our sleep
>>27270961
ah fuck I just went on google and it turns out neurons NEVER get replaced, so basically this dude is right. Your actual mind is constant.
>>27273274
I believe people who see validity in the existence of the hard problem sincerely think people who don't are just failing to notice what's obviously there. But I also believe these people are wrong and that nothing is actually there. The phenomenon feels so real, immediate, and irreducible precisely because it's an illusion. The classic example to support this point is how you can ask people to imagine a certain animal or building and then when you start probing them on the specifics of details in their imagined animal or building you come to realize they never really had a picture with those details in their head in the first place. What they have and what we have whenever we visualize something is the reporting behavior that leads you to speak and act as though you saw this something in your head even though you didn't.
If you imagine a person mimicking machine indistinguishable from us in every observable way who merely says "ow" and moves around with their face scrunched up, tears in their eyes, maybe a little body shaking, etc. then you can further imagine this is what we all are. We exhibit reporting behaviors which produce the convenient narrative of there being "experiences" of things, but in actuality, these reporting behaviors are just more complicated and self-referential versions of your basic physical cause and effect reactions like a venus flytrap closing its mouth in response to the touch of a fly. The main argument in favor of qualia existing is that we claim to have an "experience" of seeing a color or of hearing an alarm. But again, all that tells us is we're engaging in the reporting behavior of speaking and acting as though we had this "experience."
