# Life as an Upload

Discussion in 'Intelligence & Machines' started by Cris, Mar 29, 2001.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
I hate to say it, but tony1 is right on that point. It has been hinted at before, but not as blatantly stated. You still die.....

to hide all adverts.
3. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
Oh yeah, there's that problem, too.

to hide all adverts.
5. ### CrisIn search of ImmortalityValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,188
FA_Q2,

The problems we are having with the terms ‘life and death’ are because we are using them when referencing biological life. That is understandable since that is the only form we have ever known. If mind-uploading occurs then we will have to redefine what is meant by life and death in more general terms. A topic for another thread I think.

The early objective of mind-uploading will be to achieve the equivalent functions of the human brain. Will they be perfectly identical? Probably not since the substrates will be so very different. But all major aspects should be so similar that the differences would be insignificant or advantageous. The best analogy might be that of making a journey between A and B. One route might go via C and another route might go via D, but the end result is the same.

Since the target substrate algorithms will likely be based on human brain neuronic activity then we should have a good chance of achieving our goal. However, since the human brain evolved randomly then there may well be many aspects of brain function that are inefficient or redundant. We can work on those later once we have the basic template operational. At least that would be my first approach. But we may find, as we come to understand more about how the brain functions that we can make improvements as the code is developed.

Cris

to hide all adverts.
7. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
It might be much easier to go a different rout than mind uploading all together. What is I replaced your body from within with a metallic type body. Nano bots could replace your parts including neuron connections with a metallic equivalent with much less moral reproductions. It would be a simple rout from there to produce an extra limb or two. You could do anything from there. All you are doing is bypassing the initial culture shock.

8. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
A topic worthy of some attention.
"Life" should be replaced by "death," and "death" should be replaced by "don't bother me with details."

Presumably, for the purposes of draining your bank account, only facial and vocal patterns, fingerprints, gross motor skills such as those used for signing cheques, and retinal patterns will be of any concern.

Such as thought?

OTOH, what happens if the random evolution resulted in biological algorithms not easily duplicated in silicon?
Suppose the duplication of biological algorithms in silicon results in a two-ton brain requiring water-cooling?

Low-voltage chips to reduce heat might not help, since walking across an acrylic carpet could well result in that technological marvel, the artificial epileptic fit.

There are some precedents for doing that.
After all, most people who lose a leg, for example, prefer to replace the leg, rather than keeping the leg and replacing everything else.

But what are "moral reproductions?"

Or, are you suggesting analyzing every single synapse in the event that it might have anything to do with moral decisions and eliminating all of the ones that look like they do?

Given the billions of synapses, that could take a while.
Especially since you would have to check, not only the individual connections, but the pattern of connections as well.
Furthermore, what happens if a synapse has something to do with moral decisions and choice of nutrients, as well?
Let's say a synaptic connection allows you to make a moral choice (good vs. bad action) and a food choice (good vs. bad food). What happens then?

9. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
sorry, typo
Moral reproductions should read moral repercussions.
That's what I get for using the spell checker and not looking over my work.

" After all, most people who lose a leg, for example, prefer to replace the leg, rather than keeping the leg and replacing everything else. "

Yes but after I replace your leg with a real one like the one you had and also add a little hydraulic help for your muscles then why not do the same to your other leg. Maybe an arm also.

" Given the billions of synapses, that could take a while. "

And given millions of nano bots to work around the clock it would be a short process. You only need each bot to look at 1000 or so neurons.

" has anyone heard of the experiment where rats were wired to
a machine that gave them a orgasm/sexual feeling when they pushed a button?
they died of starvation! "

That is something I had brought up earlier. Why would we do anything at all if we could simply create complete pleasure. Heaven if you will.

Last edited: Aug 12, 2001
10. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
Riiiiiight.

I guess in evolutionary terms it would be a "short" process.
Maybe you're forgetting what those bots are supposed to do?
They're not just looking at those synapses.
They're supposed to figure out what they are for, you know, that "moral repercussions" thing.
They are also supposed to figure out how to reproduce them.

As you know, the nano-Xerox machine hasn't been invented yet.
As a matter of fact, neither has the nano-synapse-analyzer.
The hydraulic nano-muscle-booster also has a little way to go before it gets invented.
Even the nanobot has a little fine tuning left to do.

By "short," I guess you mean several centuries.

Either that, or this is the science fiction forum.

11. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
" I guess in evolutionary terms it would be a "short" process. "

Yea, we are talking in weeks. Maybe a month.

" Maybe you're forgetting what those bots are supposed to do?
They're not just looking at those synapses.
They're supposed to figure out what they are for, you know, that "moral repercussions" thing.
They are also supposed to figure out how to reproduce them. "

You completely missed the point. Not reproduce any morals at all but soften the outcry against it. Mind uploading will receive a lot of critiques while nano technology wont.

" As you know, the nano-Xerox machine hasn't been invented yet.
As a matter of fact, neither has the nano-synapse-analyzer.
The hydraulic nano-muscle-booster also has a little way to go before it gets invented.
Even the nanobot has a little fine tuning left to do. "

Yes the nano bots on board systems are under development. The technology is in the future. Nano bots are not perfect but they are here. They will be used in medical treatments in the future as well.

12. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
Do you actually mean "Not reproduce any morals at all?"
Or do you mean "Not eliminate all morals?"

In any case, mind uploading already receives a lot of critiques, mainly because it won't work by definition of the word "copy."

Nanomachines are here, but nanobots exist only in fiction.

There are a few issues to iron out yet, such as installing a CPU on a nanomachine, avoiding the consumption of your nanobots by white blood cells and, oh yeah, the programming of a nanobot to repair cells.

That last one might be a little work-intensive, particularly since you might not want to be the guinea pig who finds out that the nanobot is building cancer cells instead of nerve cells.
You might also not want to be the guy who finds out the nanobot is destroying cells thanks to a bug, either.

Besides, has anyone bothered to figure out how much computing power actually fits on a pinhead?

Another thing is that the general tendency is to reduce physical size and voltage levels to increase computing speed, but what happens if you build a millivolt computer that actually fits in a nanobot, and you accidentally give yourself a shock walking across a carpet?

Random behavior from millions of nanobots isn't something I'd want in my body.

As I said, nanobots are still fiction.

13. ### wet1WandererRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
8,616
Still fiction? Yes, I agree that they are indeed still fiction. So were self propelled mechanical vehicles a couple of hundred years ago. But that won't always be so. Right of wrong. The first ones will probably not be computer guided but instead chemically guided. What ever chemical trigger when found will activate whatever the design concept of the nano creation is to do.

14. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
Wow, this thread is getting longer than I expected.

" Do you actually mean "Not reproduce any morals at all?"
Or do you mean "Not eliminate all morals?"

In any case, mind uploading already receives a lot of critiques, mainly because it won't work by definition of the word "copy." "

Dammit tony you are ignoring what I am saying. Mind uploading will be attacked by society because of the copy part. Nobody simply wants a copy of themselves running around at the expense of their own life. The thing is nano technology will not get the same uproar form society because the copy part is well hidden. A few generations that get used to the technology may find it useful to copy the brain but the word copy will not be used. Maybe improve since the nano machines will have been improving other parts of the body for years.

" There are a few issues to iron out yet, such as installing a CPU on a nanomachine, avoiding the consumption of your nanobots by white blood cells and, oh yeah, the programming of a nanobot to repair cells."

All of these are difficult but not impossible. The name of this forum tends to lead one to future possibilities. Nothing talked about here is the present.

" Besides, has anyone bothered to figure out how much computing power actually fits on a pinhead?

Another thing is that the general tendency is to reduce physical size and voltage levels to increase computing speed, but what happens if you build a millivolt computer that actually fits in a nanobot, and you accidentally give yourself a shock walking across a carpet? "

I do not believe that the CPU will actually be onboard the bot itself. Most likely in a small computer installed somewhere else. Maybe like a sheet that will go under the skin. Another processor will most likely serve half the bots so that if the first is destroyed then the remaining can at leas control half the bots to get you back to health and bring the other back online. This will allow smaller bots because there only needs to be sensory equipment and have the ability to send and receive signals. Then again there is the problem with the signals not being able to get through your body and a power source......

" Random behavior from millions of nanobots isn't something I'd want in my body. "

More than likely they will shut off rather than go to random actions.

" That last one might be a little work-intensive, particularly since you might not want to be the guinea pig who finds out that the nanobot is building cancer cells instead of nerve cells.
You might also not want to be the guy who finds out the nanobot is destroying cells thanks to a bug, either. "

Of course not. An actual guinea pig will be the first to test it out. Then maybe a larger animal.

15. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
There is an ever-so-slight difference.
There is a difference in scale.
What you are talking about are synthetic enzymes.
I'm actually trying to point out the difference between what you're saying and what you think you're saying.
Actually, it will be attacked because it is so stupid.
Just picture the move Multiplicity, except that the fourth guy will always be the first guy.
At best, the first mind upload will be as "good" as that, assuming that all of the other problems are solved.
At worst, it will be a like a Playstation image of yourself.
By definition, that is what mind uploading is.
So, you are proposing to upload minds without telling the "mind-uploadees" that you are doing it?
What would be the point of that?
Technology advance by vocabulary manipulation.
Interesting concept.

You seem to think that making a copy will become not making a copy by simply not using the word "copy."

You should read George Orwell's 1984.
Pay special attention to the concept of "doublespeak."
Problems don't usually go away be doubling their number.
I can only assume that you have never owned a computer.

16. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
264
" So, you are proposing to upload minds without telling the "mind-uploadees" that you are doing it?
What would be the point of that? "

Not quite. Simply saying I am going to improve your neurons with faster more efficient ones will work. It really is not a copy but an improvement. The problem is that it might not be you at the end. But who is going to tell you about that, the others that are not themselves. Doubtful.

" Technology advance by vocabulary manipulation.
Interesting concept.

You seem to think that making a copy will become not making a copy by simply not using the word "copy." "

Almost there. It wont be a copy. It is taking the idea and slightly changing it. It is more like replacing but a single neuron is not something to worry about. The problem is that single neuron will always become more. More and more replacements and improvements until you realize you have replaced it all. Oops.

" I can only assume that you have never owned a computer."

That is defiantly incorrect.
Computers rarely do random things. Usually they go crash and you have to turn them off. If there is a problem you will have a nano BSD. Then a re-boot will have to occur.

17. ### tony1Jesus is LordRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,279
*Originally posted by FA_Q2
Simply saying I am going to improve your neurons with faster more efficient ones will work. It really is not a copy but an improvement. The problem is that it might not be you at the end. But who is going to tell you about that, the others that are not themselves. Doubtful.
*
I see where you are going with this.
The whole point is that Cris, and possibly a few others, is arguing that the copy WILL be you, and that you will/won't (he can't decide) be a copy of yourself.

What you seem to putting forth is what is happening today, except for the "improvement" part.
"Improve" is a relative term, so people missing a leg will consider it an improvement to receive an artificial leg, while they would really rather have their original leg.

Your idea seems to be that "bionic" improvements might be invented in the future.
Given the current state of science and the direction it is headed in, I'm rather pessimistic about the likelihood of that ever happening.

*It is taking the idea and slightly changing it. It is more like replacing but a single neuron is not something to worry about. The problem is that single neuron will always become more. More and more replacements and improvements until you realize you have replaced it all. Oops.*
Of course for that to actually take place, those artificial neurons would actually have to be better than what they are replacing.
So far that has never been the case, unless the target is damaged or missing.

*That is defiantly incorrect.
Computers rarely do random things. Usually they go crash and you have to turn them off. If there is a problem you will have a nano BSD. Then a re-boot will have to occur.
*

You're funny; computers "rarely" do random things?
You're also missing the humor inherent in "crashing and turning yourself off" if your artificial neurons crash.
How were you planning to turn yourself back on?

Also, consider the effects of "crashing and rebooting" while you are driving, or standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon, or skydiving, or whatever.

I'd pay $10 to watch you crash and reboot while eating, even. 18. ### FA_Q2MemberRegistered Senior Member Messages: 264 " What you seem to putting forth is what is happening today, except for the "improvement" part. "Improve" is a relative term, so people missing a leg will consider it an improvement to receive an artificial leg, while they would really rather have their original leg. " Exactly. The future will foster better improvements. Already the fastest people on earth are ones that have lost their legs and are using prosthetics. When the new ones can feel the same as the old and are more useful then we will see new limbs put on without waiting for an accident cutting the old ones off. " Your idea seems to be that "bionic" improvements might be invented in the future. Given the current state of science and the direction it is headed in, I'm rather pessimistic about the likelihood of that ever happening. " Why? " Of course for that to actually take place, those artificial neurons would actually have to be better than what they are replacing. So far that has never been the case, unless the target is damaged or missing. " Once again, the future will harbor better things. " You're also missing the humor inherent in "crashing and turning yourself off" if your artificial neurons crash. " You missed one thing. A neuron has no computing capacity. It is a single switch. I am not replacing your brain with billions of separate computers. I am replacing individual switches. All neurons are simply switches. It is your nanobots that will need the reboot. " I'd pay$10 to watch you crash and reboot while eating, even."

Only if you can tape it for me. I want to see it too

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!