Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 05:56:26 UTC No. 16100655

>>16100648
I think it's assumed if you upload the entire brain then it will contain the consciousness

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 07:25:27 UTC No. 16100775

>>16100648
consciousness is just a feedback loop

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 07:55:02 UTC No. 16100806

>>16100655
which experiment proves this?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:03:54 UTC No. 16100816

>>16100775
This. To be more precise, consciousness is an internal feedback loop.
You know how LLM transformers take both input and output as input? It's like that.
Your internal representation of external input are both processed at the same time.
It's why people experience different things when seeing or doing the same thing.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:18 UTC No. 16100822

>>16100648
>machine
your brain is a fucking machine with nanobots doing constant shit. a brain analogue is basically the same thing. like the difference between a horse carriage and a car. same function in the end, more robust + extra perks. it's not "muh digital space matrix simulation" idiocy, that's what tech and science illiterate morons think

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:11:39 UTC No. 16100831

>your brain is a fucking machine with nanobots doing constant shit. a brain analogue is basically the same thing. like the difference between a horse carriage and a car. same function in the end, more robust + extra perks. it's not "muh digital space matrix simulation" idiocy, that's what tech and science illiterate morons think

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:17:16 UTC No. 16100839

>>16100831
where argument

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:11:42 UTC No. 16100940

>>16100806
There is none. That's why they'll have to do experiments etc

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:53:48 UTC No. 16100970

>>16100655
Okay, how do you upload it? Let's assume you have a computer, doesn't even have to be digital, with the ability to perfectly replicate or simulate the brain's workings, what is the integration point to assure that you as a thinking conscieous being will continue to think and be conscieous as your current squishy meat brain is cut off from life support?
>Inb4 afterlife
entering the afterlife doesn't count, you would need to figure out how to continue to be conscieous in this world specifically, a replica of you living on doesn't count.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:58:28 UTC No. 16100977

>>16100970
nta but replicating all the brain's functions related to neurons and connections. perfectly scan the brain at whatever resolution and replicate it with other hardware, such that it functions the same, as activity goes. before activating it, after copying all info, kill the bio body and start the artificial brain. if this happens to you it will be like closing your eyes in bio body and waking up in synthetic one. it's really that simple. that's what I personally think will be the case, supposing we get to tech level necessary to pull it off of-course.
this whole discussion inevitably goes into what we actually are, which is firewalled by religions and philosophy and other bullshit

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:02:01 UTC No. 16100981

>>16100977
And how would you attach your conscieousness to the new artificial copy?
>it would just work
We could do that same exact thing today, just clone the person, and then kill them and by your logic, that person would transfer conscieousness to the clone, that makes no sense.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:03:40 UTC No. 16100982

>>16100981
And until you can say what conscieousness actually is based on, or at least what laws does it's behaviour follow, every answer you come up with won't make sense either.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:04:27 UTC No. 16100984

>>16100981
I told you this will inevitably go into what the fuck we actually are. don't know how to dumb it down so you "get it" or in a way in which it makes sense to your primitive brain. not even joking. you can't understand it if you insist we must be something that we are not.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:05:31 UTC No. 16100985

>>16100982
>And until you can say what conscieousness actually is based on,
the brain obviously anon wtf

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:06:14 UTC No. 16100986

>>16100984
Well, yeah that is the difficult part, which makes this literally impossible for now.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:08:40 UTC No. 16100987

>>16100986
understanding it is irrelevant for almost everybody, really. get it or not (they) will try it, and it will most likely work. that happens irrespective if you believe it or not. such is science.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:11:46 UTC No. 16100993

>>16100987
That's not how science works, thats like saying I can put any objects that look like wings on anything and fly it with perfect precision.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:14:36 UTC No. 16100995

>>16100993
if you identically reproduce the brain activity of you that is also you. that's how everything works anon. you reproduce the same conditions and you always always get the very same thing. what the fuck is even science if not?
the simple answer is that (you) will tell everybody else he is (you), because he is you. really really. but again, here is the disconnect. you primitively think you will lose yourself or some weird shit like that.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:16:14 UTC No. 16100997

>>16100995
>the simple answer is that (you) will tell everybody else he is (you), because he is you.
I mean the new synthetic brain (You) will tell everyone else that he is you, after you clone/copy yourself. he will literally be fucking you. this is what you can't understand, or accept rather.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:22:45 UTC No. 16101005

>>16100997
No, that would be a clone of me, he would think like me, act like me, he would even believe he is me in the sense that he probably wouldn't realize he's a clone, maybe he would know that he is a clone, but he would not have my coscieousness, he would have his own conscieousness. separate from mine. He would act and think independently from me, even if he does it in the exact same way that I would.

🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:45:12 UTC No. 16101034

>but he would not have my coscieousness, he would have his own conscieousness.
holy shit bro how do you know this??? apart from chimp brain telling you "it's obvious"?
even if I arrived at the same conclusion myself, maybe you believe Max Tegmark, explaining it here:
https://youtu.be/XEUiqpYSe_I?t=3665
the short of it is that when you clone the observer, what happens next is in a sort of superposition, you get chances of waking up in original body or any of the clones you make at that point.
if you make 3 clones you have 25% of waking up in either original body or one of the three clones body.
if you destroy the original body manifesting you, and you only make one clone, you effectively get 100% chances of moving to the clone. that's it. and there's no quantum magic moving your consciousness energy bullshit, it's really really simple. you just refuse to understand it because chimp brain reasons. you are smart by using that argument (it's not my consciousness) it's actually quite retarded, in the literal sense. you are a moron failing to understand something. and you are also proud of it kek

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:46:47 UTC No. 16101035

>but he would not have my coscieousness, he would have his own conscieousness.
holy shit bro how do you know this??? apart from chimp brain telling you "it's obvious"?
even if I arrived at the same conclusion myself, maybe you believe Max Tegmark, explaining it here:
https://youtu.be/XEUiqpYSe_I?t=3665 [Embed]
the short of it is that when you clone the observer, what happens next is in a sort of superposition, you get chances of waking up in original body or any of the clones you make at that point.
if you make 3 clones you have 25% of waking up in either original body or one of the three clones body.
if you destroy the original body manifesting you, and you only make one clone, you effectively get 100% chances of moving to the clone. that's it. and there's no quantum magic moving your consciousness energy bullshit, it's really really simple. you just refuse to understand it because chimp brain reasons. you are not smart by using that argument (it's not my consciousness) it's actually quite retarded, in the literal sense. you are a moron failing to understand something. and you are also proud of it kek

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:47:55 UTC No. 16101036

>>16100648
>this idiot thinks you can transfer consciousness into VRAM/etc
imagine trying to sound like a smart ass and being this retarded at the same time. Couldn't be me.

If you interfere with neural pattern continuity in any way, at all, you just made another person, dumb ass.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:49:44 UTC No. 16101037

>>16101036
>If you interfere with neural pattern continuity in any way, at all, you just made another person, dumb ass.
you brainlet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_hypothermic_circulatory_arrest

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:58:45 UTC No. 16101043

There is only one universal consciousness. Wanting to live forever is a primitive egoic ape desire. "You" don't even exist as an individual entity, you will die and return to the source and "you" will love it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:16:26 UTC No. 16101059

>there are "people" who still "think" that brain uploading is cut-paste and not copy-paste

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:20:57 UTC No. 16101064

>>16100775
>>16100816
Correct. It was found years ago, there's a spot in the brain, I think near the center (possibly in the amygdala?) that controls that feedback loop.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:26:35 UTC No. 16101076

>>16101059
>copy
just copying is a backup only. you paste from backup only if you wipe

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:34:38 UTC No. 16101086

>>16101076
what?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:38:59 UTC No. 16101097

>>16101086
cut-paste is when you move to another body. copy-paste would needlesly make another you active at the same time which is retarded.
but you can copy your brain as a backup, and restore from it if you die in active form. and you lose all experience between backup and when you die. that is when you restore from a backup, which you made by copying.
cut-paste would effectively move you in another body but if you don't keep the info you don't have a backup. if you die you die like everyone else died so far, because no more info of you.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:41:05 UTC No. 16101101

>>16101036
Anon, the you from one second ago is a different person than you right now.
The only difference is that your current existence is continuous, i.e.: you're replacing your old you with a new version.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:50:45 UTC No. 16101117

>>16101097
>that is when you restore from a backup
this is a copy a paste, the person getting restored is not the same that died

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:55:05 UTC No. 16101122

>>16101117
>the person getting restored is not the same that died
if they die say a year later after backup, and you restore them, it will be them just without last year experience.
think of you hitting your head and fully losing past year's memories, everything. if you restored from backup, you'd find yourself in the same situation, you can't remember anything that happened past year, but you glad you still alive.
technically there are some differences but are irrelevant for the sake of this example. if you experienced something which created some neural networks in response, you'd still be under the influence of those networks even if you banged your head and forgot past year. like if you started doing meth and became a junkie, if you hit your head and forget last year experiences doesn't mean you'll not crave meth. or similar shit. but if you restore from backup you fully lose everything experienced in the year you're now missing. that's it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:59:58 UTC No. 16101126

>>16101122 me
from your point of view, it will be like you fast-forwarded one year in the future, just like that. technically only one year died for you, not all. do backups more often and you risk loosing less. get it to realtime backup and you're basically immortal, if you have the resources to jump bodies like a madman

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:00:31 UTC No. 16101127

>>16101101
>different
>continuous
Make up your mind. If the universe is a binary math machine then everything and everyone is going on/off all the time. Every instance is a slight deviation from the previous instance not a perfect duplication. Continuity is a spook.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:11:03 UTC No. 16101148

>>16101037
Is it the same observer who arises, or is another who inherits the memories and deludes itself that nothing changed?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:11:50 UTC No. 16101149

>>16101126 still me
and that also means that when you scan your brain for backup purposes, there's a chance you instantly fast forward to where you were restored from backup, because you'll always actually be, if you have the resources clearly. you will eventually wipe with any body you have. at any time you probe yourself/your memories you'd have experienced just that, always jumped when you got backed up. depending on how often you back up and how often you tend to wipe, at any point in the future when you're looking back you always jumped past the versions which wiped. that means that it's eventually imminent you'll scan and the very next experience is you restored from that scan, in the future after you wiped. you will wipe, we always did, we always will. just that with backup you can resume, and it forms this weird chain of always jumping over what kills you. it's kinda weird but makes sense.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:12:48 UTC No. 16101151

>>16101122
>it will be them
no it won't, they are dead.
it will be a backup of them

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:12:52 UTC No. 16101152

>>16101148
>Is it the same observer who arises, or is another who inherits the memories and deludes itself that nothing changed?
funny that you're making this distinction, for whatever reason. what is the reason anon? scientifically speaking.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:13:55 UTC No. 16101155

>>16101151
>trust me bro

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:15:32 UTC No. 16101159

>>16101155
>trust me dude, if you do a scan of your brain you can magically jump years or even millennia in the future

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:15:55 UTC No. 16101161

>>16101152
Scientifically speaking there's no observer at all, and the question doesn't make any sense. Subjectively I observe, so what is I?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:21:08 UTC No. 16101166

>>16100648
The arrogance of overeducated science plebs never ceases to amuse me. I'm playing with the idea of starting a sea buckthorn oil enterprise once I can determine the seedlings' sexes. I'd have the following disclaimer: the miraculous health benefits known in antiquity are now attested to by NIH studies, but I do not claim that Methuselah's Oil™ will make you live to be 969 years old.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:27:38 UTC No. 16101169

>>16101161
that's like saying if you ride the subway the 5g antennas are replacing you with a perfect clone who doesn't know it's not you anymore, continuing to live just as you, but poor sucker doesn't know he's just a clone who stole someone else's life.
I can't prove this but you have to believe me, you are a fucking clone, you are not the original you. you have been replaced at some point.
see how retarded that sounds? you cannot lose yourself without being aware, the concept is fucking retarded and has nothing going for it other than chimp brain primitive concepts and expectations.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:31:21 UTC No. 16101172

>>16101159
>if you do a scan of your brain
and if it's good enough scan, and it's used to restore you, meaning someone willing to pay for the whole thing. it's not enough to get a scan, you'd kinda have to convince others to help you exist, restore you from the copy when you wipe.
but having a brain scan seems like having way higher chances of somehow getting rebuilt from it, as opposed to not having any info saved.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:39:49 UTC No. 16101176

>>16101169
Except that 5g antennas don't disrupt the continuity of brain activity. Sleep also doesn't. Light anesthesia also doesn't. Deep anesthesia does. The procedure you mentioned also does. Death does. A copy of a brain does.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:44:53 UTC No. 16101185

>>16101176
wait are you saying people who've been under anesthesia are copies of them and they actually died and are gone and a copy is living their life? in the same fucking body? that is fucking insane

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:46:12 UTC No. 16101188

>>16101185
No, I'm saying that the observer might be a different one. Would that equate death in your opinion?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:47:56 UTC No. 16101193

>>16101188
>No, I'm saying that the observer might be a different one.
that is not something scientific, that's just strange. making the distinction, it's religious/philosophical stuff, not science anon. reality doesn't bend to your expectations of it, it just is.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:48:58 UTC No. 16101195

>>16101188
>Would that equate death in your opinion?
death is loss. if you're not aware of anything missing nothing died.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:54:13 UTC No. 16101202

>>16101172
what happens if the scan is restored in multiple brains?
just stop it dude, this is embarrassing

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:55:23 UTC No. 16101206

>>16101193
>philosophical
Absolutely. But think about it like this: If you hypothetically copy a brain and it becomes aware, you end up having 2 observers, one for each brain. Another option is that both have a shared observer, but I personally can't bend my mind around how it would work.

Now assuming that 2 observers is what happens, how about when a brain continuity stops? Is the continuity itself the observer, or is it something external? I'd lean for the continuity, since external source for the observer doesn't fit my beliefs. If the continuity itself is the observer, then it ceases when it breaks, and that's what I find is the most plausible result based on the various assumptions.

What do you think?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:58:15 UTC No. 16101211

>>16101202
well, it is for you the way I see it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:02:21 UTC No. 16101217

>>16101202
>>16101206
notice how you're conjuring scenarios which have never happened anyway and expect them to make sense because ... ???
when did having two of you at the same time made perfect sense to you that you are now expecting a classical solution to? with chimp brain you'll always error out on it because you never ever had to deal with it, so far, so you don't really have an intuitive way of thinking about it.
your brains on hollywood religion and philosophy

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:04:00 UTC No. 16101221

>>16101217
I hope you're aware that copying a brain isn't science either. No-one has done it, there's no experiments. This thread is all philosophy, every single thing about it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:08:34 UTC No. 16101230

>>16101221
this shit is old anon, people been working at it for a long ass time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwBVR68z-fg
they done the math on number of operations and are working on different approaches to scan the build a synthetic brain. they are going at it with neuromorphic hardware and also brain simulation in digital space. there's serious money in this. stop being monkeys and user your fucking brains, not your feefees.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:10:40 UTC No. 16101232

>>16101230
That's a hypothesis. Mapping out steps isn't science. Results are.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:14:20 UTC No. 16101237

>>16101127
"Anon, I have no idea what you're talking about. Would you mind explaining what you meant?" "Of course, anon! It's no problem at all. To elucidate..."
It's literally that easy, anon. There's no need to reply to your own thoughts while mentioning me.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:18:12 UTC No. 16101244

Researchers need to stop wasting OPM and start with something more modest and practical, like using neuromorphic processors to infer what birds are saying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMDr_luEqS8

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:21:52 UTC No. 16101252

>>16101232
https://open-neuromorphic.org/neuromorphic-computing/hardware/
https://www.westernsydney.edu.au/newscentre/news_centre/more_news_stories/world_first_supercomputer_capable_of_brain-scale_simulation_being_built_at_western_sydney_university

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:23:08 UTC No. 16101254

>DeepSouth uses a neuromorphic system which mimics biological processes, using hardware to efficiently emulate large networks of spiking neurons at 228 trillion synaptic operations per second - rivalling the estimated rate of operations in the human brain.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:26:57 UTC No. 16101261

>>16101252
Man, I don't know how you can miss my point in such a manner. Engineering isn't science. Science is validation of knowledge based on replicable experiments. The key point is "validation of knowledge". The engineering is done to FIND OUT what happens, based on a hypothesis. Hypothesis means an assumption, which is inherently unscientific, because it deals with the unkown. Hypotheses are however a must for the process, since it's the platform you engineer a test on top of, to validate or discard your hypothesis.

So far, all the stuff you've linked is engineering the test itself. The test hasn't been done, there's no results. There's no science, yet. For now all there is is speculation, since there's nothing else yet.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:28:33 UTC No. 16101265

>>16101254
There's truly going to be a Tower of Babel incident with godlike technology like that and the competency crisis. Бyдeт пoлный пиздeц.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:32:55 UTC No. 16101272

>>16101261
>assumption
funny you're mentioning this with your whole "observer might be different" bullshit which has zero scientific standing. there's literally nothing you can use to argue for this, it is that fucking retarded. because it's nothing scientific about it.
it is primitive bullshit which makes no fucking sense, logically even. where what I explained makes perfect sense and is to be expected if reality works the way we think it does at this point.
you're arguing for "it didn't yet happen so I can say whatever the fuck I want until it does", which is fair up to a point. but I know you'll go full retard until the very last second when results will be published, few years in the future most likely. that is what belief dictates, evidence means jack shit as long as you have faith amirite

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:35:03 UTC No. 16101274

>>16101265
I'm pretty retarded politically speaking so I can't predict how the fuck that works out. I'm interested in the science part of it. as in what's possible

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:37:46 UTC No. 16101279

>>16101272
>unny you're mentioning this with your whole "observer might be different" bullshit which has zero scientific standing.
Exactly, because this is a philosophy thread. That's my hypothesis. Is it actually correct? We will see! What you fail to see is that in terms of science, your hypothesis stands equal to mine. We both have our biases, which science aims to solve. I hope you reflect on this and learn to respect the silly ideas other people hold. It'll make dealing with other people more pleasant as well.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:38:26 UTC No. 16101280

>>16101274
I think the internet will fail in the near future.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:42:54 UTC No. 16101289

>>16101279
>your hypothesis stands equal to mine.
no it doesn't. with all due respect yours is fucking retarded while mine makes perfect logical sense and is to be expected based on laws of this universe. you for no reason believe an observer which has ZERO relation to the brain manifesting it is somehow possible, for primitive reasons. without having anything scientific supporting it. it's a lunatic wild claim, nothing else.
what I said is purely based on everything else we see in this reality, we assemble something in a certain way, it behaves in a very expected/predictable way. I have literally everything going for what I think will happen and you have literally nothing scientific going for your belief.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:43:56 UTC No. 16101292

>>16101280
That helps people who have resources do it silently. Solves nothing.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:52:12 UTC No. 16101298

>>16101289
>what I said is purely based on everything else we see in this reality, we assemble something in a certain way, it behaves in a very expected/predictable way
Unless there's unkown variables. Which is what I propose there is based on the same tool of logic, logic which operates upon axioms of belief.

Babby's first heliocentric model being lunacy is what you feel right now. I think your claim is cool, even though I disagree with it. I jumped on the discussion midway so I don't actually even know what it is but I'm sure it is cool.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:55:16 UTC No. 16101305

>>16101298
>Unless there's unkown variables.
this is not an honest arguing style because you can claim that for anything. it's pretty cheap, intellectually speaking.
>everything could change tomorrow
yeah but statistically speaking if we'd bet on it you'd lose all your money to me.
the "everything could change tomorrow" is so bottom of the barrel. it's always the coward's way out.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:58:46 UTC No. 16101310

>>16101305
>you can claim that for anything
You claim too. It's equally cheap, except you do it with arrogant lack of self-doubt.

>everything could change tomorrow
What do you mean by this? I didn't claim that, so you must have inferred it from something.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:03:56 UTC No. 16101318

>>16101310
>with arrogant lack of self-doubt.
it is a form of hope and cope, if you will, but using logic, more reliable
>What do you mean by this?
pulling random unknowns from your ass. ultimately you can claim them for everything. I have no proof speed of light won't suddenly change tomorrow. no real reason to expect it tho

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:08:02 UTC No. 16101322

>>16101318
Fair enough.

My experience of the observer is hardly a random unkown to me at least. It's the only constant of my life actually.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:15:45 UTC No. 16101330

>>16101265
that didn't happen with nukes, at least not yet.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:17:22 UTC No. 16101331

What if you exploded a brain into atoms and reassembled it perfectly 1 nanosecond later

What if you swapped all the hydrogen atoms in a brain for different hydrogen atoms in an instant

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:18:36 UTC No. 16101332

>>16101322
sure but you don't have proof your consciousness can exist without your brain. your brain might make you experience some stuff, but you don't really know, especially if that thing is not shared with others, or testable in any way. and brain is good at stories for cope. plus the whole innate egoism thing, which sets some paths to walk.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:23:49 UTC No. 16101335

>>16101332
>you don't have proof your consciousness can exist without your brain
I don't think it can in the first place. I think consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, a process. A process that is continuous. It also somehow has an experience, which is the weird part.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:37:58 UTC No. 16101351

>>16101064
>controls that feedback loop
ladies and gentlemen, we did it
we found the homunculus

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:39:40 UTC No. 16101353

>>16101335
emergentism is the "god did it" of physicalism

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:39:49 UTC No. 16101354

>>16101335
yeah but if you can't tie it down to any unique particle, and we know all atoms are identical, and we constantly exchange them, you must logically arrive at the conclusion that it is some higher level arrangement of these atoms that manifest you. stopping it and resuming it shouldn't change anything, it's still you. if we stop it in this brain configuration and start it using different materials which result in the same activity, is it not still you?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:47:07 UTC No. 16101364

>>16101354
On a computer, when you start an application, is it the same process of that application the same each time, or is it a separate one? If you spawn two instances of the same application, is are the processes seperate instances? Does an instance have something unique for it to qualify as an instance? I think there is something unique, and the "observer of experience" is that differentiator, whatever it is.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:48:27 UTC No. 16101367

>>16101364
> is it the same process of that application the same each time
Should be "is it the same process of that application each time", sorry for the dyslexic typos.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:49:58 UTC No. 16101369

>>16101353
Materia willed it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:58:05 UTC No. 16101379

>>16101364
there was a famous case for someone who had some brain surgery and removed some bit and he couldn't form any new memories. but still had old ones. every day the same shit. at most he could remember for minutes and would reset.
if you spawn two instances, that it's not something you can get meaninful intuitive information out of since you never had to deal with that.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:02:36 UTC No. 16101383

>>16101379
Far more relatable experience of memory loss is an alcohol induced blackout. You don't store momeries from that either, and later you don't identify with the person who operated relatively fine during the blackout. In terms of self-identification, I think both memory and the observer are essential, and form a whole.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:07:10 UTC No. 16101388

>>16101383
but that is clear example of how matter and chemicals affect your consciousness. it's like...they are intimately tied and fully depend on eachother.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:09:58 UTC No. 16101394

>>16100648
i need hope that i'll upload myself into a cyborg girl body ok?

>>16100816
how legit is the paper claiming transformer models are similar to models of the hippocampus?
i feel like the human brain is a lot more recurrent than any artificial neural net

>You know how LLM transformers take both input and output as input? It's like that.
the joke among techbros is that humans are just constantly online real time RL agents.

>>16101064
is there any paper on this?
i think most laymen (myself included) latch on the idea that consciousness is just continual brain activity

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:11:50 UTC No. 16101397

>>16101388
Tied to your memory?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:12:56 UTC No. 16101400

>>16101388
Yes, but there's always a viewer. Even in the case of no memories being made, there's the viewer without retention.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:19 UTC No. 16101404

>phenomenal experience appears to be asynchronous
>different features are perceived separately, but somehow are bound together
>there is no global clock, the same object at different times can be mapped to several areas simultaneously
>spontaneous activity has the same amplitude as task-evoked activity
what the fuck is going on?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:33:28 UTC No. 16101427

>>16101397
the brain activity is still forcing you to face reality as it were. with no memories I guess you lose your identity but if your brain works fine you build a new one. dunno how that works neurologically. but I think there have been people with full memory loss.
>>16101400
yeah since the brain is active it's generating you, which starts doing shit. interacting with reality. you get hungry/thirsty you feel like taking a piss or a shit, you do shit, decide if you do it now or later, here or somewhere else, you are facing these decisions without any memory. you start building a sense of self? while being forced to respond to reality?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:06:27 UTC No. 16101676

>>16100648
>Consciousness
>>>/X/

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:24:50 UTC No. 16101705

Sciencecucks need to accept two things: You will NEVER ever truly understand what consciousness is, and there will NEVER be a grand, unifying theory that reconciles the Standard Model with General Relativity.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:26:23 UTC No. 16101711

>>16101705
prove it

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:28:03 UTC No. 16101715

>>16101711
No

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:35:43 UTC No. 16101727

>>16100655
Heh-heh-heh. If you upload an entire rock will it be hard? What does it even mean to upload a brain? Some people really have issues with logic.

In the defense of retarded mind uploaders if AGI comes then it may really figure out consciousness.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:37:29 UTC No. 16101735

>>16101676
The NPC revealed himself. I really think some people don't have consciousness.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:40:23 UTC No. 16101739

>>16100648
I will download your consciousness and make you fucking suffer forever

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:46:28 UTC No. 16101755

>>16101739
(You) can't afford that, and won't for a good bit of time. you're more likely to die of old age than get any life extension tech, or get uploaded. nobody really wants you. everybody who has ever given you any kind of attention is because they hope you work for them. once your work is cheaply replaceable by robots you won't have much worth, nobody will want to keep you alive forever, there's no real reason to.
there's also a fuckton of people offering themselves for anything just to live a bit more, they'd do anything. and they'll also be cloned as fuck. since they will be able to, and plenty of people who'd have no issue making 1 million of them. you won't afford to make anyone suffer anon. or even keep yourself alive.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:49:36 UTC No. 16101765

>>16101739
Anyone who makes such a claim should immediately be hunted down and be executed on spot for being a threat to all existence.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:55:51 UTC No. 16101778

>>16101394
>i feel like the human brain is a lot more recurrent than any artificial neural net
I wouldn't be surprised if long term memory would be the only thing we're lacking to turn an LLM into a general purpose AI.
We're already re-using output as input, might as well create symbolic links between context and memory and re-use that as input too.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:41:20 UTC No. 16101872

>>16100816
>>16100775
>>16101101
>Muh you're just "emerging" from a bag of meat...how? idk, just trust me bro!
I can smell your early life and nose length from all the way here, you demoralizing nihilistic faggot.
Equally likely, you're just severely autistic CS graduate with no spiritual intuition, in this case my apologies and condolences.
>>16101043
That's retarded.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:46:43 UTC No. 16101882

>>16101872
>how?
shit happens even if you don't understand it. nature doesn't really care if you understand it or not.
and you should be glad, otherwise your phone wouldn't work because you'd be too retarded for that.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:50:28 UTC No. 16101891

>>16101755
>AHHHHHHHH I'M SUFFERING SOOOO MU-
>pause program
>-CH AAAAAACK
>>16101765
you're going inside the paid box too, buddy

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:06:17 UTC No. 16101935

>>16101872
Midwit detected.
"I don't get it so it must not exist!"
Please do go on about how the earth is flat.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:09:18 UTC No. 16101943

>>16101935
We both know that you don't get it either.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:21:50 UTC No. 16101973

>>16101943
>o-oh yeah?! no, u!
lmao, you midwits are hilarious

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:25:54 UTC No. 16101990

>>16101973
I didn't felt the need to engage in "you're stupid! No, you!" exchange before, but you proved you're guilty of your own charge just now, you know

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:26:53 UTC No. 16101993

>>16101990
I dislike salted popcorn. Sweet popcorn is where it's at.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:28:19 UTC No. 16101997

>>16101882
not everyone will just "go back to source" as if nothing happened, then our lives would be superfluous. Imagine thinking evil people will just be able to bask in the glory of God upon their death lmao

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 09:49:26 UTC No. 16103057

>>16101997
>"go back to source"
I am not claiming such thing. we have no idea about what else is going on, but I expect moving our consciousness in "synthetic brains" should work. that doesn't discount other weird shit that might be going on.
if moving our consciousness in more robust hardware works, that implies there's something about the structure encoded in the information. which does this weird "holy shit I am" thing we experience. we don't know "who else" can access this data, from outside our universe, if there even is an outside. some god might be able to take the info and do whatever the fuck he wants with it.
all I am saying is that I think we can move our consciousness in different hardware and take advantage of that in a number of ways, in this universe based on the laws we so far discovered. that's it bro, nothing else. I am not implying other shit with this.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:21:52 UTC No. 16103103

>>16101394
>is there any paper on this?
There is. I'll try to find it.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:35:17 UTC No. 16103108

>>16101097
They don't move neurons to another body that would be pointless since the neurons are the weak biological things that die, they make virtual copies of them.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:36:36 UTC No. 16103109

>>16101172
>copy
There you go again admitting it is just a copy and your neurons didn't actually move to another body.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:41:12 UTC No. 16103112

>>16101161
The body filled with sensory organs that is sensing the observation.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:04 UTC No. 16103128

>believes in souls
>believes in life after death
>DOESN'T think it's possible to put a soul in another body to occupy
That's even more insane

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:32:19 UTC No. 16103152

>>16103109
>didn't actually move
(you) are encoded in the information that is getting moved you dense turd

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:39:10 UTC No. 16103166

>>16103152
It wasn't moved, it was copied because it is a copy/paste not a cut/paste.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:26:30 UTC No. 16103295

>>16101035
A literal indie video game clowned on that position pretty convincingly.
I personally don’t say it’s wrong. But there’s a lot of IFs you don’t mention here.
And to know for sure you’d have to solve the hard problem.
Or to answer within your own paradigm: you can’t say if a change in medium wouldn’t necessitate a change of „output“ thus making a perfect copy next to impossible

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:37:24 UTC No. 16103307

>>16101035
What fictional universe are we talking about?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:39:54 UTC No. 16103309

>>16101676
Fuck of dennet

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 16:01:30 UTC No. 16103325

>>16103295
>A literal indie video game clowned on that position pretty convincingly.
what videogame?
>But there’s a lot of IFs you don’t mention here.
as long as we get the ability to scan at required resolution (tech might already be close or even there, just not implemented) and perfectly rebuild it, the argument stands. how it's implemented, how much, to what degree etc (for neuromorphic stuff) that's a different discussion. having the whole neural stuff + nerves cut out for various functions which are not needed in neuromorphic hardware is most likely not going to change who you are. if you don't need the whole breathing and other bodily automation in the brain.
what really matter is if it works. in the simple sense that if there's nothing missing and person who does this brain hardware change feels like themselves, report nothing is missing, that's all that really matters. if others do it and it works, and you refuse to do it because muh invisible undetectable spirit stuff...you gonna get owned by them, fast. you can philosophize about it how much you want, make it illegal, or say you lose your soul if you do it. if it works and there's nothing missing, and everybody gets along with it, the level of perks that offers is beyond anything humans ever came up with. travel at light speed between points you reached and have robo-bodies with those synthetic brains you can just upload to. no limitations for operating in a martian base, without a protective suit or whatever, no bio microclimate to maintain. everything becomes cheaper, faster, and you're not loosing important people anymore. great scientists or whatever.
you can do whatever the fuck you want. nobody is making you do shit.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 16:49:39 UTC No. 16103365

>>16103128
>believes in life before death
Are you insane?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 17:02:48 UTC No. 16103380

I don't see why anyone would want to live in a virtual world anything like our own

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 17:07:25 UTC No. 16103389

>>16103380
they won't, they'll live in exactly this world, it's the cheapest way actually. god I hate digitards

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 18:59:20 UTC No. 16103578

>>16101035
>the short of it is that when you clone the observer, what happens next is in a sort of superposition, you get chances of waking up in original body or any of the clones you make at that point.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:03:49 UTC No. 16103584

>>16103578
you're just dumb

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:11:33 UTC No. 16103595

>>16101872
>severely autistic CS graduate
This is how we get progress, apply ideas from other fields over to new fields. Taking a "CS" approach to neuroscience is essentially how you get a field like Cognitive Science coming into existence, which may yield complete bullshit but it does not seem so.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:15:06 UTC No. 16103599

>>16103128
Nobody here believes in souls except for Deepak Chopra trolls. There's no place for a "soul" in either physicalism or idealism - dualism doesn't make any sense and hasn't been taken seriously in educated spaces for decades

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:23:00 UTC No. 16103613

>>16100995
It's literally impossible to do what you're talking about, and it is logically impossible. This is the Law of Identity, a thing cannot be both itself and something else at the same time. How is this other you also you if you are you? You don't need to define "what we actually are" because what you're saying is logically incoherent. Not even taking into account it is physically impossible; the other you exists separately in time and space, which automatically makes it "not you". Part of "you" is your position in spacetime, another you cannot exist perfectly layered over yourself.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:27:13 UTC No. 16103619

>>16103613
>This is the Law of Identity, a thing cannot be both itself and something else at the same time.
I don't give a fuck about that anon, it's not a scientific argument
>I say so
doesn't work that way. you need to tie it to something unique, which is the collection of info. that can be captured.
you can't go randomly stating you have something which cannot be captured as information with no scientific backing to it. you just can't, stop being retarded.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:27:31 UTC No. 16103620

>>16103613
NTA and I agree with you that he is retarded and incoherent,
but to your point, What about dreams? I can make a decision in my dream, and I might be on the Moon in my dream, but simultaneously I(my body) is asleep at home. Is the dream me the real me?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:28:08 UTC No. 16103621

>>16101035
This is utter onions science, I have seen this exact plot point on fucking television shows. This is what evil people will try to sell you, "100% chance of moving to the clone guaranteed!" (except we're just gonna kill you lmao)

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:34:03 UTC No. 16103635

>>16103620
>NTA and I agree with you that he is retarded and incoherent,
what don't you understand?
>I have seen this exact plot point on fucking television shows.
holy shit really? there's two of you already using computer games and tv shows to disprove the idea. wow

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:39:07 UTC No. 16103640

>>16103619
>I don't give a fuck about that anon, it's not a scientific argument
I give the scientific support with the position point. A part of "you" is "where" and "when", so the fact that you cannot exist in the same spacial and temporal position as anything but yourself means the Law has support in science. Only way out of this would be asserting identical multiverses, which has zero support.
>doesn't work that way. you need to tie it to something unique, which is the collection of info. that can be captured.
>you can't go randomly stating you have something which cannot be captured as information with no scientific backing to it. you just can't, stop being retarded.
This isn't "I say so", these are the logical rules which underpin math and science. If we can't even coherently discuss the topic because it fails against fundamental logical rules, it's obviously not going to be something that can be captured with science because logically impossible shit doesn't exist.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:39:16 UTC No. 16103641

>>16103621
what about on your death bed retard? when doctor says you have 10 hours at most, family is there to say goodbye. would you do it then? think nobody will do it?
what if after moving to synth body dude says "guys, it kinda is still me, not gone. I just moved in this body and feel great. weird but it's me"
what then?
>bro there's this law of id and you're not real you just think you are
mf I'd bash your head in lmao, telling me I'm not real and shit. holy shit you really are drooling retards aren't you? can't argue for shit

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:39:34 UTC No. 16103642

>>16100995
>the simple answer is that (you) will tell everybody else he is (you), because he is you. really really. but again, here is the disconnect. you primitively think you will lose yourself or some weird shit like that.
the simple answer is that (you) are a newfag and a psued, really really, and you make assertions and expect anons to believe them or some weird shit like that>>16103635

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:41:49 UTC No. 16103646

>>16103640
>A part of "you" is "where" and "when", so the fact that you cannot exist in the same spacial and temporal position as anything but yourself means the Law has support in science.
that's schizophasia you don't understand what the fuck you're talking about
>>16103640
>This isn't "I say so", these are the logical rules which underpin math and science.
how do you know that applies to humans? give me some scientific paper linking your consciousness to your body, but in a way that cannot be captured for some reason. that's what I care about not your word salad.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:45:21 UTC No. 16103651

>>16103620
Your first mistake is identifying yourself with your body. Your self is the experience of your body, so when you're dreaming, you're experiencing your body sleeping. In that experience time and space play by different rules, because your brain is not viewing any outside information (time and space are stable when the light source is stable, when you're asleep there's no light source and thus no time, only space)

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:46:14 UTC No. 16103652

>>16103642
>nd you make assertions and expect anons to believe them or some weird shit like that
I do not expect you to believe anything. I'm telling you what is most likely going to happen. I don't care if you believe it or not, I just enjoy seeing you embarrassing yourselves and having meltdowns for failing to understand reality.
I'm talking about the subject and exploring ideas and applications, and try to understand how that would change social dynamics and weird shit like that. I also enjoy other anons ideas about what might happen with this tech.
I don't really care if you believe me. if none of you do, I'm telling you that you are all wrong. simple as.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:49:43 UTC No. 16103657

>>16103651
>Your first mistake is identifying yourself with your body.
scientific paper that you are not consequence of your body.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:54:05 UTC No. 16103664

>>16103657
I said that you are a consequence of your body, that is what is meant by "your self is the experience of your body", it was in the context of dreams

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:56:22 UTC No. 16103666

>>16103641
I'm not living in some attack of the clones world, people try to clone themselves and I will not treat them as human. I'm more than willing to bet that this person's theory is false and not take the risk.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:00:04 UTC No. 16103672

>>16103666
sure satan. you will chose death. others won't, in other countries. you run your little bullshit semantic games and you will get mogged, fast. the mechanic will colonize the whole solar system, and fast. while you play your law of identity games

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:14:30 UTC No. 16103689

>>16103672
Do they not make you retards take a philosophy course to graduate anymore, why is there such a strong opposition to basic logical concepts? This is why so much science is trash these days, complete nonsensical grasp on logic and language.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:16:42 UTC No. 16103692

>>16103689
>Do they not make you retards take a philosophy course to graduate anymore,
philosophy is irrelevant to whether it works or not. what?
>why is there such a strong opposition to basic logical concepts?
oh you have no fucking idea of the irony in that statement.
>This is why so much science is trash these days, complete nonsensical grasp on logic and language.
yet you can't make a single fucking scientific argument which applies to this ideas for the life of you. you seem to have philosophical and maybe even religious ones, but not a single scientific one. weird innit

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:29:07 UTC No. 16103708

>>16103664
do you think atoms are unique? that it matters which atom of same element is part of you? or any of the same type of atom works the same?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:39:45 UTC No. 16103720

>>16103708
Do you think there are more than one atom of the same type in the world? If so, what is the difference between them?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:49:44 UTC No. 16103732

>>16103720
>If so, what is the difference between them?
well clearly location but apart from being in a different place they seem to "work" the same.
you do know you are going "you are not possible without your particular set of atoms" which is just a fuzzy cloud in continuous exchange with the environment. you are not so well defined, from second to second.
to me it looks like you are forced to take this position so other stuff you think about things still makes sense, because you personally favor that narrative and view of the world. your denial of what can happen is a consequence, not the result of scientific thinking. it's trying to forcefully fit something in that would support your other views. and you're willing to argue that it's possible atoms are individually unique and they uniquely define you and you are not possible with any other atoms apart from those particular ones, exactly them. that's kind of out there. there's people with missing limbs which still seem to be them. good bit of atoms missing and nothing seems to change, apart from the obvious mental ones.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 20:55:46 UTC No. 16103736

>>16103732
>well clearly location
So if they occupy the same space they are both the same atom or let's say photon? Or if they switch places, has atom A become atom B?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:04:31 UTC No. 16103746

>>16103736
>So if they occupy the same space
that is not possible.
>Or if they switch places, has atom A become atom B?
well yes functionally, I'm not aware of anything which would say replacing one atom with another changes anything. anything at all. you still have the same object, functionally, transistor gate, whatever application.
if I perfectly build a few identical transistors they will all occupy a different place in space but will function identically, interchangeable. there's nothing differentiating them apart from location.
what about atoms which are not yet in my body but will be? say I drink a beer. think all of the atoms that are going to be part of me are out there spread out and if I somehow miss one beer that I should have drank (for whatever reason) I suddenly lose my identity? is this some destiny bullshit?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:16:38 UTC No. 16103771

>>16103746
>that is not possible.
It is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle
And even if it wasn't that's not the point. You used that to avoid answering. Very weak, anon. That is poor form. Shame on you.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:16:57 UTC No. 16103773

>>16103584
>you're gay, says man in the midst of sucking twenty cocks in a row

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:20:11 UTC No. 16103774

>>16103771
>It is.
you asked if they can occupy the same place I said not you said they can and linked
>In quantum mechanics, the Pauli exclusion principle states that two or more identical particles with half-integer spins cannot simultaneously occupy the same quantum state within a system that obeys the laws of quantum mechanics
you need meds

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:21:12 UTC No. 16103776

>>16103773
not an argument though

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:23:26 UTC No. 16103780

>>16103746
>replacing one atom with another
Sounds like you admit that they are not the same atom but that their function is the same as far as you know.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:24:59 UTC No. 16103786

>>16103776
How exactly am I supposed to argue against
>HURRR I'M RETARDED HUURRRRRR DURRRRRR

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:28:03 UTC No. 16103792

>>16103780
>that their function is the same as far as you know.
not me, I think like...science? unless you can show some paper saying all of them are unique and not interchangeable.
what would you say is the mechanism between your consciousness being tied to some unique IDs for atoms which are not only part of you, but will be part of you. can you dodge them and have your consciousness fucking die and your body taken over by a new consciousness which is not you but it doesn't know it's not you, it just thinks it's you?
how the fuck is this not mental fucking disease? flatearthers do the same, the exact mechanic, trying to find something which makes the rest of their bullshit not fall apart

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:29:07 UTC No. 16103793

>>16103774
Wow, this is getting embarrassing for you.
>Particles with an integer spin (bosons) are not subject to the Pauli exclusion principle.

>>16103774
>you asked if they can occupy the same place
No, I absolutely did not. You need to learn how to read and stop projecting about others needing medicines.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:29:12 UTC No. 16103794

>>16103786
you're clearly arguing to the best of your abilities, I'll give you that much

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:30:44 UTC No. 16103797

>>16103793
yeah that's clearly an argument for why another new consciousness will take over your life without it realizing it's a new consciousness. you really argued for that anon.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:37:43 UTC No. 16103806

the question is, how are you stopping future you learning chinese or russian, by force, because you get mogged by them if they implement the mechanic? think making pauli exclusion jokes will get them to back off?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:38:58 UTC No. 16103807

>>16101272
You are the stupidest fuck this entire year, and I mean it.

Any other lurkers absolutely incredulous at this retard who is getting filtered by the concept of different subjectivities?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:41:51 UTC No. 16103811

>>16103797
I have no interest in continuing discussion with a principleless turd who ignores anything he feels like willy nilly like a slimy worm. Or rather, that is not possible.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:41:51 UTC No. 16103812

>>16103807
second hand embarrassment knowing someone from the future might read your comments at some point

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:42:52 UTC No. 16103814

>>16103811
you are a turd who made no coherent argument. doesn't matter what you know if you can't make a proper fucking argument. you can't use anything as a placeholder.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:45:12 UTC No. 16103819

>>16103814
>

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:45:25 UTC No. 16103820

>>16101727
At best you can make a digital copy of the information in the brain. The have a fantasy level understanding of the word "upload"

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:49:09 UTC No. 16103830

>>16103651
"You" has multiple loci. The innermost is pure subjective experience, which you experience in dreams. But your body is still coextensive with that which constitutes the "total you".
If we aren’t our body (we are, as I freely admit, also simultaneously "just" that dream subjectivity you mention. It’s a subset relation), then why would we wake up upon water being sprinkled over your body during sleep? You may say because the brain generates an saliency impulse that reaches your dream self — but see what happened here. The brain has undertaken an action divorced from your dream self. In what way is a certain brain pathway about reaction to cold water embedded inside that minimal self of pure awareness you are getting at?

If you say that some neurochemical reaction to cold water is not in a meaningful sense part of „you“, then why do you feel a very real unpleasant sensation?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 22:06:57 UTC No. 16103857

>>16103819
yeah you are made out of magic. a magical turd

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:36:15 UTC No. 16104069

There was no coinflip in SOMA and the concept of people thinking their consciousness actually jumps from body to body gave me actual brainrot trying to read and comprehend the absolute stupidity in this thread. Like holy fuck, how can you think this? My backup or copy is not me, it is that fucking simple.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:49:46 UTC No. 16104097

>>16104069
>My backup or copy is not me, it is that fucking simple.
yeah like you'd know

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:54:23 UTC No. 16104106

>>16104097
Yeah, I do. As someone who has experienced an nde. You are entirely within your meat and when you die there will be nothing but void, cope for thinking souls are real. Consciousness is entirely within the brain. There is no coinflip you massive retard. Actually kill yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:55:40 UTC No. 16104110

>>16104097
I'm literally a not statement in a human container, not not is not a not.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:56:18 UTC No. 16104111

>>16104106
You seem emotionally distressed by the thought of you not being able to tell if you were replaced or not. Don't take it out on me.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:58:48 UTC No. 16104115

>>16104111
Again, kill yourself. I won't take you seriously and I will treat you like a schizo /x/ poster if you genuinely think your consciousness is separate or externally mapped from your body. Your physical state encodes all of your information. You are stupid as fuck and my IQ has been psychiatrically tested to be 147. I'm not entertaining your brainrot for a moment more. It isn't even proper philosophy, it's just self redundant sophistry.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:01:10 UTC No. 16104119

>>16104115
You seem confused anon. I only said that your matter arrangement generates (You), and any number of identical matter arrangements manifest the very same (You).

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:05:13 UTC No. 16104131

>>16104119
Nope, even position is an aspect of physicialism in regards to information about an object. My copy could never be completely parallel to me including time and space, thus neither objects are the same. You didn't solve the transference problem, you're a moron sophist. I'm gonna post my face now to really make you understand how stupid you are. Kill yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:05:22 UTC No. 16104132

>>16104119
well to be fair I also said the very same (You) will pop up if the electric activity is replicated with other materials.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:07:08 UTC No. 16104137

>>16100816
>Your internal representation of external input are both processed at the same time.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:10:18 UTC No. 16104144

>>16104137
Correct and it makes sense when you consider that no level of computation within our physical universe is instantaneous, even photons require motion in order to function. Reality being experienced is an internalized recreation that is effectively hallucinated in a controlled way and then projected outwards with the expectancy to correlate with the states of the external. Humans are interpreter based compiling.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:11:25 UTC No. 16104146

>>16104144
Wat nou?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:14:24 UTC No. 16104150

>>16104146
Recursion principles have pretty low complexity if you ask me. Are they not that different than circular models?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:20:34 UTC No. 16104167

>>16104131
>My copy could never be completely parallel to me including time and space, thus neither objects are the same.
but they generate the same thing, (You). which has no idea if he's clone or original. why is that?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:24:29 UTC No. 16104176

>>16104131
>You didn't solve the transference problem
Everything that is in you is transfered in clone. Quite literally. You will know nothing that the clone won't know, you will feel nothing that the clone can't feel. You are as unique as the light from a flashlight, or the light from any identical flashlight. you are an effect of the arrangement.
>I'm gonna post my face now
You do seem to like looking at yourself on social media

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:46:15 UTC No. 16104206

>>16104176
It isn't though and their processes become entirely desynchronized the moment there is multiple objects in question,including physical space. Both deviate substancially as time increases from the event. There is no realm in which your perception makes sense logically speaking.
>your physical condition isn't unique!
Actually, it is, and I don't need to be a solipsistic schizoid with protagonist disorder to reconcile with the fact. There will never be another me with 100% of the same collective experiences and physical characteristics that will be paralleled unless the universe were under some super-deterministic cyclical model that only morons that believe order is low complexity would try to convince me of. The very basis of this thread entails a change in material substrate, which is an aspect of my information being changed. Your concept of simulated substrate to be inherently the same as one of physical flesh is delusional. Also, I don't use social media other than 4chan.
>>16104167
No, they do not. I refuse to believe you're not invoking poe's law right now as some kind of troll. I will not take you seriously. Scanning someone's consciousness doesn't even necessarily imply this captureed state interupted the consciousness of the original. You just assume it always does, in order to benefit your troll argument. I wish there were thread IDs so I could know for sure I was posting in a schadenfreude thread.

I am more autistic than you by the way, moreso than anyone else you've tried to reply to so far. So I will absolutely have the last word here if you think that's the win condition to an argument. It isn't and I've won multiple times over, but I absolutely am murderer tier and will continue to post and make you look stupid until 404.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:50:38 UTC No. 16104211

>>16104144
>no level of computation within our physical universe is instantaneous
Wrong, the information about the state of reality is always recorded by virtue of existence itself and as soon as the state changes the transmission of the information of that change is as fast as the change itself aka instantaneous

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:54:24 UTC No. 16104218

>>16104211
Buddy, even the expansion of our universe isn't constant, with relativity in regards to time dilation being demonstrated in less than extreme conditions, like ones contained entirely within our own biosphere. If a clock doesn't even run at the same rate at sea levels as it does on a mountain peak, how can you say this state change is uniform across the entire system? Get fucking real.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:56:21 UTC No. 16104223

>>16104206
>It isn't though and their processes become entirely desynchronized the moment there is multiple objects in question,including physical space. Both deviate substancially as time increases from the event. There is no realm in which your perception makes sense logically speaking.
>desynchronized
schizophasia
you still can't tell you're not original you. you keep making up shit and avoid addressing the practical part. scientifically speaking there's no observation you can make to differentiate the two. in a double blind experiment not either of you or the scientists can tell which is which.
>I will not take you seriously
you can do whatever the fuck you want you brainlet. holy shit this is filtering many many pseuds.
>I am more autistic than you by the way,
yeah bro you a magic turd

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:07:43 UTC No. 16104231

>>16104218
No, you don't understand, the information about the existence of something has to be recorded somewhere, right? Why would there be a delay in information transfer when that information is automaticaly known as soon as it comes to existence?
Think about it like this, you've got two atoms on the opposite ends of the universe and they want to communicate, so one sends out an electromagnetic impulse, takes trillions of years to travel, but the information about both atoms is already there, their properties, their position, already recorded, by virtue of existence itself, why would reality have to communicate with electromagnetic signals when the information of everything that exists is already present and as soon as anything changes that information change is instantaneous and instantly known?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:10:48 UTC No. 16104233

>>16104231
To move a ball from one end of the table to the other you still need to push it.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:16:09 UTC No. 16104240

>>16104233
And as soon as you move even a planck length reality instantly knows that it happened, it is known by virtue of existence, since, if something exists then information about its existence must be present and known, if there was no information about the existence of something it would not exist, I'm not talking about playing with balls here, I'm talking about the function of the underlying firmament of reality, your existence and perception of sense-exciting forces is completely irrelevant in the equation.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 02:47:16 UTC No. 16104265

>>16100648
It is pretty ironic that literal substance dualists have the most standing for brain immortality scifi

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:15:27 UTC No. 16104477

>>16104223
Didn't read what you had to type, you've already been btfo'd I do accept your concession by the way. I know for a fact you're a troll and absolutely nobody with a brain would hold your perception of anything works. You are vapidly broken, I refuse to believe you are genuine. There is no way in any fashion you will ever be correct, and this entire thread is just you being btfo'd by multiple people, but your inability to walk away demonstrates to me that the only thing you came in here for was to rile people up with bullshit contrarian arguments for the sake of pissing people off, thats what your concept of winning is. It's fucking pathetic. It's so pathetic, I'm not going to let you revel in it. You've been called out, and I'm gonna serve your sentence, you stupid fuck, now kill yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:19:45 UTC No. 16104482

>>16104231
>>16104240
Schizobabble, virtue of existence is an utterly meaningless statement. Just because a set of all sets is likely self containing doesn't suddenly mean said set would be characterized through "virtue".

This thread is schizo bait, I'm never again going to consider /sci/ an academic board after this. The stupidity in this thread alone is enough to give /x/ a run for its money. How does it feel, knowing to most people, you are comparable to the lowest IQ and functioning board on this website? Does it feel good? Godanm.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:22:06 UTC No. 16104486

>>16104240
>reality knows

You can't prove there is an ultimate representation of reality that is capable of being aware, nor can you even prove super determinism. Please kindly fuck off.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:45:25 UTC No. 16104507

>>16103732
I am every bit my body, if an aspect of my body was removed, then it would affect the total sum of my conscious state, which includes but is not limited to direct mental awareness, my potential to commit motion is every bit myself, and altercations to those fundamental actions are irrevocably changing my core behaviors. It is because of my body that I am allowed to be conscious, and clearly all information about my consciousness is encoded within that physical body, and this process is entirely individualistic. If this were not the case, we wouldn't be relying on imageboards for basic mental exchanges. I don't feel like I need to go really indepth with the philosophical aspects of this, given how it follows common sense. I feel like this is a zeno's paradox situation where we can easily dismiss most of what is being assumed in this thread by the basic mechanics are already commonly observe within day to day living. You should probably touch grass and not come up with smelly theories on your ivory coomer box upon which you've established your distortion of reality.

As another anon said in this thread, there was no coinflip in soma. If you have drawn another conclusion from experiencing the game from how the narrative was presented to the player, then I'm gonna have to say you might have brainrot.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 10:00:21 UTC No. 16104584

>>16104223
>in a double blind experiment not either of you [...] can tell which is which.
They definitely will subjectively know, just by comparing their memories. You also imply that they are separate, with deviating paths.

Your comparison with particles being identical and thus the same isn't equivalent with larger systems, which can evolve into a different states.

🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:42:09 UTC No. 16104741

>>16104477
am not contrarian, just don't really care how many retards are telling me I am wrong. it's as simple as. you can make a pertinent argument, to explain why a perfect clone wouldn't know it's not the original. without going into unrelated bullshit.
also not trolling, am curious about the subject and what other anons ideas are.
>You've been called out
whoever is calling me out can choke on my cock anon

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:44:43 UTC No. 16104744

>>16104584
>just by comparing their memories.
they're identical that's the point, all of them move with copying the brain structure.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:46:06 UTC No. 16104747

>>16104477
>>16104482

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:53:12 UTC No. 16104759

>>16104744
From the split on the memories differ.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:04:08 UTC No. 16104769

>>16104477
you error out thinking about it because you think once your body goes away the (You) side-effect of that body's material structure goes away forever, somewhere, you don't know where or why, but you're fucking sure of it, somehow, unexplainable.
(You) pop into existence every time an identical material structure is assembled, because it's manifesting (You) obligatory like another LED diode emits the same fucking light. it must happen, if you assemble the LED correctly it will obligatory emit light in a certain spectrum defined by the physics of its structure.
so (You) will pop up every time in any identical material structure. you have it the wrong way around in a (bad) intuitive way.
we know the LED light can be turned off
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_hypothermic_circulatory_arrest
when it's powered back the very same fucking light pops back out. the same (You).
so, if apparently it doesn't fucking matter if you turn the light on or off, and the diodes are identical, there's no real difference between (You) popping up in any clone. just make sure you only have one LED lit up at any time, not more, and it makes perfect sense and you don't even care. or know.
but so far, whenever the LED light went off for any amount of time, the LED broke and light never came out of it. do you think this has something to do with the retarded idea that you are uniquely tied to your present body?
>>16104507
>there was no coinflip in soma.
I keep hearing about this game, I have no idea about it, and neither of you managed to say anything that makes any sense, you keep mentioning the game. movies and games explain what you are thinking, that's so fucking dumb

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:05:31 UTC No. 16104771

>>16104759
yeah but if you go to sleep/anesthesia, get cloned, wake up, both of you will have the very same memories, both of you will think they are original and no memory differs, apart from the waking point forward. so, based on that..which one is which?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:12:17 UTC No. 16104776

>>16104771
I think the important part is that they're not the same, since their necessarily differing future dictates so.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:18:27 UTC No. 16104788

>>16104776
yeah and it's a good argument for not running two of (You) at the same time. You can't have a consistent timeline this way. Which of the two (You) we follow forward? Does the other also get citizenship with ID and has rights to your goods? It's kinda retarded innit?
you are not doing well with gedankenexperiments, you error the fuck out
>but I did have breakfast

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:17 UTC No. 16104792

>>16104788
>Which of the two (You) we follow forward?
Both? They're completely separate entities from that point on. I'm not completely clear on what point you're arguing for here.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:23:30 UTC No. 16104797

>>16101035
Lmao isn't this literally the plot of that Christopher Nolan le magic movie?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:29:56 UTC No. 16104803

>>16104792
look, the moment you copy the info of your first body, in the very same next planck unit of time your present body diverges from the copy.
if you build a new body, after it's built that too will start diverging from the copy. the copy is a snapshot, nothing else. the only difference is where in space you are located. if you copy and nothing else, you are where your first body is, that's you single active instance, your perpetual original body. if you don't stop it, eg destroy it.
the thought experiment is about having two bodies of same information origin, they clearly diverge from that seed as time passes, neither of original or clone is similar to seed info, they both go in two different ways based purely on their location in space, that's it, no other difference between them, other than the environmental effects from their place in space.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:33:45 UTC No. 16104805

>>16104803 me
and from the medical procedure where your body activity fully stops for up to one hour, we know it doesn't matter if your body doesn't manifest you for a while. when it starts doing it again, it's still you.
so, during the operation, if you copied and fully destroyed the body, and somehow reassemble it the very same way, and start it but in another operating room, it will start up, and the very same person is still inside. the same consciousness.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:40:03 UTC No. 16104813

>>16103708
>atoms
what if all your body's atoms get jumbled put in a container and then later you get reassembled from the very same atoms put in the very same position? if we use your own atoms then it should still be you, by your own thinking

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:41:25 UTC No. 16104815

>>16104813 me
meant for >>16103720

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:52:01 UTC No. 16104830

ok, I think I figured out why most people have issues with understanding it. they are working with a wrong premise and inevitably error out and have to come up with wild shit.
so, the wrong assumption is that you exist somewhere else than here, like a unique soul which God knows personally, unique ID, and this soul of yours has access to all of your possible "incarnations" here in 3D, and only happens sequentially never in parallel. so another you in parallel with you makes no fucking sense in this framework, because your "soul" doesn't have a way to access the clone's experiences. some of you expect to have the clone's perspective/experience as well at the same time, and I think that weird thought stems from the framework you built so far, around this subject.
you won't be able to reconcile it with reality, you will have to come up with weird shit like "oh another consciousness takes over the clone, but that new consciousness doesn't know it's new"
you are non-scientifically fighting for a non-scientific premise for which the only justification you have is some sort of intuition, but no fucking science.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:01:32 UTC No. 16104844

>>16104803
>they both go in two different ways based purely on their location in space, that's it, no other difference between them, other than the environmental effects from their place in space.
If consciousness stems from the body, then when the body is different (the state changes, new atoms come in and old go out) the consciousness is also different. It isn't parallel, it's split path from a same source.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:08:46 UTC No. 16104856

>>16104844
ok but how much does that matter if you have that surgery? once you start it again it's clearly different by your logic. so then..is there a new consciousness in that body who doesn't know it's new and mistakenly thinks it's the original one? and takes over that poor suckers life? and he actually fucking died and someone else is fucking his wife?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:10:10 UTC No. 16104858

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:12:39 UTC No. 16104860

>>16104856
In thought, yes. In practice, does it matter? The old one isn't anymore, and the new one is functionally the same. The only downside is that the new one might have existential dread with the idea if he subscribes to it. The old one doesn't have that capacity, since it's no more.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 15:19:03 UTC No. 16104867

>>16100648
You don't need to define consciousness to be able to that. Just wanted to point out your logical fallacy, fyi

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:32:18 UTC No. 16104960

>>16104769
What identical material structure are you duplicating that allows for there to be jump in occurrence of consciousness you dumb fuck? If I'm uploaded, or replicated then I'm no longer of the same material at all, regardless of whatever you believe to be achievable with pure computational alternatives. The fact that I am a being of pure nature made of flesh that no man can replicate even with the most zealous attempts of fiction means your argument doesn't make any godanm sense.

The literal only way there could ever be a 100% duplicate for me to jump to, assuming this quantum tunneling nature you keep trying to attribute to consciousness still couldn't occur unless we lived in a super deterministic universe that were entirely cyclical in model. This way we could actually claim there was a informational duplicate to even exist in the first place. Any other situation will result in that duplication having some form of information regarding it altered that we can easily conclude they are no longer the same object. Location and substrates can be quantified as variables thus they are at the very least bits of information that can't be dismissed when trying to calculate the sum of persons potential for motion or action.

>>16104771
Again, why was the interruption of the originals functio necessary in order to create the condition for your absurd argument to make sense? You sound like an idiot.
>>16104803
This is so obvious, I don't know why it needs to be stated. This entire thread is actual retardation. These people don't even have a leg to stand on, why even bother btfoing them again and again?

>>16104830
No you fucking moron, it's not hard to grasp that in order for you to truly claim that you were moved from one body to another and there to be some unknown rule of consciousness that goes against common sense of physicality of identity in a universe where individuality and death are the only certain conditions would demand parallelism.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:43:36 UTC No. 16104974

>>16104747
>I'm gonna post this basedjack buddy your life is over

I accept your concession. You didn't solve the transference problem. You are entirely your body and philosophy can actually be disregarded if it rejects common sense, which is precisely why things like zeno's paradox aren't interesting thought experiments. I say this as someone who throughly enjoys philosophy and have at times, been compared to diogenes by peers. You are a naive fool.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:46:31 UTC No. 16104978

>>16104960
>this quantum tunneling nature you keep trying to attribute to consciousness
I have made no such claim, I never said it's anything quantum about it. you are encoded in the material structure, that's it. just like light of a certain wavelength is encoded in the plans to make a LED. it's not complicated or quantum transfer or shit like that.
>why was the interruption of the originals functio necessary
because if you want to run a single one of (You) at any time, you must terminate previous instance if you switch bodies.
>unknown rule of consciousness that goes against common sense of physicality of identity in a universe where individuality and death are the only certain conditions would demand parallelism.
you are so fucking dumb and primitive holy shit.
you cannot afford to keep up the charade, it will come down because it will get insanely expensive. dissonant twat

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:48:41 UTC No. 16104984

>>16104974
>You didn't solve the transference problem.
everything gets transfered when the information is captured. everything IS in the information you collect. I keep repeating it and you keep ignoring it.
you cannot change what is moron, you can only pay to maintain your fantasy.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:53:03 UTC No. 16104992

>>16104978
You don't even know what you're arguing, nothing of what you said counters my points of the fact that your backup is not you, and you will have zero way to experience that you. You haven't proposed a genuine solution to the transference problem in this thread you vapid fuckong moron, all you've done is speculate pseud nonsense while making big claims that don't make any godanm sense to my objectively superior range functioning mind.

>but I'm not that anon!
Then why the FUCK are you responding to me? Kill yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:54:10 UTC No. 16104994

>>16104984
Nope, incorrect. I described variables that cannot be encoded into the duplicate that make your argument fall apart and you keep ignoring it. Kill yourself.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:55:15 UTC No. 16104996

>>16104482
What does this have to do with sets? If something exists there must be information about its existence and its properties, right? What is that information imposed on?
>>16104486
>You can't prove there is an ultimate representation of reality that is capable of being aware
Nigga what the fuck do you think life is?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:57:32 UTC No. 16105000

>>16104992
why aren't you arguing my point, that everything gets captured in the copy?
if you scan the dude during the deep hypothermic surgery thing, while he's offline, and destroy his body, are you implying his "soul" is missing from the collected information?
if so, do it directly anon, argue why his "soul" is not captured, and also scientifically define this soul that is getting lost. do it directly without going into other retarded shit.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 16:58:42 UTC No. 16105001

>>16104994
>I described variables that cannot be encoded into the duplicate t
>because I say so
you fucking brainlet

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:01:26 UTC No. 16105005

>>16104996
What are you even trying to argue here? Explain how the person I was responding to possibly made more sense than me with his nonsense statement about virtues? Nobody fuckong knows where that information is encoded other than direct physicalism upon which science operates. No, you aren't a God or ultimate representation of reality. You approximate things entirely, thus any ideological perspectives you have on the subject have no basis in science. Ignosticism can be easily applied here if you're trying to get religious. Don't like it when people give you nonsense retorts to your arguments? Don't come up with nonsense arguments.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:04:27 UTC No. 16105008

>>16105005
How about reading the reply chain, you fucking illiterate retard

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:04:57 UTC No. 16105010

>>16105001
Location cannot be encoded into the duplicate within a physical universe, it's common sense. Two people can't occupy the same physical space at once, I don't need to even begin to get deep into facts to state this obvious one. So that's one point for me and my common sense over your crack smoking abstraction. Two, a person made of electricity is not the same as a person made of red meat, that's yet another point for me. I could expand this to include other variables, but your argument is so easy to defeat, it's entirely unnecessary.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:06:44 UTC No. 16105011

>>16105008
I read the entire thread and it's fuckong retarded. Virtue of existence isn't a coherent statement. It's schizobabble. Nothing will change that absolute fact. I am one of the smartest people on this planet with an Iq 147, so if I didn't get it, then it's a you problem, not a me problem.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:06:50 UTC No. 16105012

>>16105010
>Location cannot be encoded into the duplicate within a physical universe, it's common sense.
PROVE THE SOUL IS TIED TO INITIAL LOCATION IN SPACE YOU FUCKING IDIOT

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:07:45 UTC No. 16105015

>>16105012
>soul

Doesn't exist or can't be proven. Ignostism applied, not science or Academia. I accept your concession, have a terrible day.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:10:28 UTC No. 16105019

>>16105015
ok counsciousness. even worse, because there's clear evidence of the contrary, where the clone is telling you he is indeed you. quite insists on it. that's evidence the same consciousness is also present in the clone. which becomes a different one just like the original you became a different one from clone copy point.
now there's evidence that same consciousness is in clone. what do now? how are you denying this?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:11:19 UTC No. 16105022

>>16105012
>prove that my soul?(replacing this with identity so I can compute your retardation) is tied to a location. Sure, easily. The fact that I'm having to use a computer to type to you right now from a singular location on on our only planet demonstrates this just fine. Nowhere in reality is there a representation or approximation of myself that will ever attempt to imitate me within my lifetime to make me even speculate this nonsense. It is proven. The world is the explanation.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:12:20 UTC No. 16105024

>>16105019
My clone could claim to be Jesus or a frog or even Hitler and none of those things would a true. A clone is a clone, done. Read the entire thr

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:13:59 UTC No. 16105025

>>16105011
>Virtue of existence isn't a coherent statement
>by virtue of
>phrase of virtue
>because or as a result of.
>"they achieved pre-eminence by virtue of superior military strength"

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:14:59 UTC No. 16105027

>>16105019
Just because a conscious identifies as something, does not make it become that something. A therian who fully experiences himself consciously as a cat, isn't a cat just because they experience themselves as one. This is why we can easily call the therian delusional. You are delusional.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:16:05 UTC No. 16105031

>>16105025
What is superior? That's subjective and easily dismissed. There is no objectivity to virtue you delusionally righteous "muh only right path" fuck.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:17:41 UTC No. 16105033

>>16105031
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:18:21 UTC No. 16105036

Also to the retard I'm arguing with. I hope you enjoy this, because I warned you that I wasn't going to let you revel in it and I mean it. I don't even have a job, so I'm going to be here all day to casually btfo with arguments thar even my grandmother without even a high-school diploma could understand.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:18:22 UTC No. 16105037

>>16105024
your clone would clam what you'd claim for fucks sake. as long as you can't even tell you are the clone if you got replaced in your sleep you don't have a fucking point.
if some blackops cia glowie would randomly tell you tomorrow that you are a clone, been part of some weird experiment and they've been watching you for the last month, would you deny everything you experience based on fucking words? are you that much of a retarded cuck that you'd start having a meltdown due to fucking words, without you feeling anything changed and you feel like you, like you always fucking felt?
that's fucking insane. that's mental disease, that's lesser human mind locking itself up. it's a fucking malfunction. you literally error the fuck out

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:19:24 UTC No. 16105038

>>16105036
well I know whoever understands the concept is mocking you

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:19:38 UTC No. 16105039

>>16100648
mh, given that even you have it, im not sure if consciousness is that worthwhile to study

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:28:34 UTC No. 16105045

>>16105033
You're shitposting? Wow, color me surprised. How virtuous of you. Religious fags like you should be picked.
>>16105037
Identity is encoded within information systems to degree, however just because a flesh is given a name and a life, doesn't suddenly give it immunity to the same conditions of physicalism that all other objects obey. A duplicate can be an extension of the source of identity, and will likely be treated as such when and if humanity comes up with some kind of solution or alternative to classical death. That still doesn't suddenly mean that extension broke the rules of physicalism. A clone is still a clone, regardless of identity.
>>16105038
If you say so. I called him out already about this being a shitposting schadenfreude thread and I'm the only one who's actually onto their tricks. Just because I'm engaging with mutual violence doesn't mean they're winning. I am absolutely making them look stupid as fuck to anyone with common sense.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:29:51 UTC No. 16105049

>>16105037
>You're clone could claim
Irrelevant to the discussion. Identity is not consciousness.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:32:58 UTC No. 16105056

>>16105036
>I wasn't going to let you revel in it and I mean it. I don't even have a job
notice how that is you trying to fight for your internal narative to not just fucking collapse. you are in fight&flight mode because your internal worldview is under threat, and instinctively you have to keep it together.
also notice how I'm mostly just asking questions, you answer them in your head and you must fight the logical response your own brain gives you, and you project it on me. I basically become le bad because I made your brain tell you a logical fact.
why do I have to pay for your dissonance anon

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:36:27 UTC No. 16105060

>>16105037
If a human being tried to approach me with any form of words to change my mind, it will absolutely be taken secondarily and compared to my own internalized models first. You could claim anything and I wouldn't take it faith. Science is an approximation and there is zero absolute knowledge to be had by man.


I have a wonderful reductionism I created to help you cope with this.

"For even though it is but a shadow of the truth, it has made for many great works for modern and ancient make alike."

Science is a tool, not reality.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:39:15 UTC No. 16105065

>>16105060
>Science is a tool, not reality.
it's a tool to explore reality. but it's not as easy as you'd think. you have to constantly fight yourself, brain is so good at cope.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:40:07 UTC No. 16105067

>>16105056
No, I just find your stupidity to be offense to my superior intellect and think you're trying to play higher level games just to upset people. You don't want genuine discussion, you just want to fuck with people. You've taken Academia and made it into a mockery and used spirituality, something I have extreme disdain for being agnostic as a vehicle for it. I would genuinely murder you with my own two hands if I were physically near you. Do you understand? Why else would I post my face if I didn't absolutely hate you with the force of a thousand sun's? You are repulsive.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:41:02 UTC No. 16105069

>>16105045
Your lack of basic language comprehension shows that you have mental deficiencies

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:45:37 UTC No. 16105074

>>16105069
I have an Iq of 147, I've been psychtriacally tested on multiple occasions. You will never ever EVER make ME, an actual fucking KING of 4chan feel inferior in any shape or form. I can play the role of narcissio and you can only play jester. I can however and will absolutely fucking blow your asshole open when you try to talk about moral imperatives and characterizations of reality that are entirely interpersonal and relative as if they're not. You are vapidly fucking stupid.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:47:16 UTC No. 16105075

>>16105067
I refuse to think that most of well read anons here are literal brainlet wannabes. I prefer to think of you being in dissonance and a bunch of uptight twats.
>Why else would I post my face if I didn't absolutely hate you with the force of a thousand sun's? You are repulsive.
why are you getting emotional anon? reality tunnel went to shit?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:51:21 UTC No. 16105080

>>16105075
Read the fucking thread you literal nigger. Everything that could be stated under the sun to btfo you has been state and proven. There is only one valid argument or conclusion to be had here and that's the simple conclusion that the transference problem has not been solved, and we are going to have serious issues ethically trying to reconcile with that when and if these technologies become available. It is and will remain to be that simple. If you don't know what the game people are referencing when it's been brought up by 20+ people in the thread, then maybe you should fucking Google it. I am fucking done playing stupid semantics games with retards that don't know what they're talking about. Religion is not a fact of life and I will literally kill you to be right on that subject. Religion is legitimate war on intelligence.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:55:40 UTC No. 16105086

>>16105080
>the transference problem has not been solved, and we are going to have serious issues ethically trying to reconcile with that when and if these technologies become available.
you seem to be fully missing the main point. besides that I am not religious, tho I am agnostic, I am actually saying what in the actual fucking fuck are you going to do when other state actors are doing it in secret? strategically speaking? as an yuropean I'm good with the english I know, really not looking forward to learning chinese or fucking russian.
what the fuck will you do when one of the other fuckers are doing it, and all of a fucking sudden people you kill pop back up? what the fuck do you do then? that's what this all is fucking about.
that, that is what I mean by expensive. this shit will become literally expensive, in resources, to entertain, without scientific evidence and proofs. this kind to silly talk will start to be seriously put to test, if it fucking works in practice, and nobody is complaining.
do you fucking understand the main point of the discussion, actually, you utter imbecile? do you need me to draw fucking pictures to you?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:56:06 UTC No. 16105087

>>16105075
You can try to keep pretending, but we all see through your bullshit. My reality has not once been brought into doubt or question by this thread. It is conclusively impossible for consciousness to jump from body to body, the world is the explanation. Anyone claiming to be a reincarnation is a fucking larp.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:00:45 UTC No. 16105091

>>16105086
What kind of questions this? I don't fucking care about anything you have stated. I only care about the fact that your consciousness cannot jump between bodies regardless of whatever absurdity technology makes me engage with. As an absurdist, I have no issues with that. The issue I have is the concept of something being a fundamental aspect of reality never even once occurring naturally so far , to suddenly now be in consideration on the basis of identity? No anon, you are not unique or special, nor is your clone that will firmly believe itself to be you and replace you. Do these conditions made the classical definitions of identity seem silly? Sure, but at this point what fucking isn't?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:03:04 UTC No. 16105093

>>16105091
>The issue I have is the concept of something being a fundamental aspect of reality never even once occurring naturally so far , to suddenly now be in consideration
how do you not notice it for fucks sake

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:06:54 UTC No. 16105097

>>16105074
>psychtriacally
You got psychiatrically checked by god when you fell head first onto the ground as you exited your mother's vaginal canal

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:07:17 UTC No. 16105101

>>16105093
Again, super determinism is literally fake a gay tier and the only way I could "notice" it topologically speaking is if it were a cyclical universal model. Where I could say there is zero variation between universal cycles for the collective that is (me) to ever occur more than once over an infinite timescale. When you die, you cannot play the game of life anymore, nobody in human history, yourself included has ever lived more than once. Anyone claiming to, is delusional.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:08:21 UTC No. 16105102

>>16105097
Is that the best you can come up with? Even your meme aren't funny.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:28:14 UTC No. 16105130

Reminder that even if you are cloned or digitally replicated, that the body experiencing the consciousness within it right now that identifies as itself and potentially you as well will most certainly face the absolute void one day. All you can do is cope with that. No amounts of highly unethical technology will save that experiencer of the flesh. You are going to die.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:32:07 UTC No. 16105138

>>16101394
>be incel
>buy qt3.14159 robowaifu
>It's actually a fag
I shiggy diggy you guy's don't do this

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:40:31 UTC No. 16105147

>>16105130
How do you know?

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:47:15 UTC No. 16105155

>>16105147
The fuck kind of question is that? The same way we know solipsism isn't true, even without absolution, it goes against everything we've come to establish as coherence within our system. If ghosts were real, it'd be predictable enough to recreate as a phenomenon that would have made it become an established science. The fact isn't helps to clarify plenty for most people. Relativity is fun, but it does have limits within a predictive and absolute universe. You can't prove super determinism or disprove it, yet every operation and process depends on that causality.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:49:16 UTC No. 16105158

>>16105147
I know because reality has hard-coded rules you cannot escape from, that disprove every single piece of fiction claiming to be reality. Jesus was a story.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:50:51 UTC No. 16105162

>>16105147
I have an idea, how about I kill you and then you try to come back here and keep posting.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:51:11 UTC No. 16105163

>>16104813
I haven't said anything about what my thinking is but that is one theory. If I had a better memory then I'd know the name for it because all of these theories are well known and have their own names. None of them prove anything though.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:53:26 UTC No. 16105166

>>16105162
fuck off you petty loser

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:55:31 UTC No. 16105168

>The supercomputer, known as DeepSouth, is being developed by Western Sydney University.
>If researchers can work this out, they could someday create a cyborg brain vastly more powerful than our own. The work could also revolutionize our understanding of how our brains work.
>DeepSouth is just one of many research projects aiming to create a machine that will rival the human brain.
>Other researchers are trying to tackle the same problem by creating "biological computers" powered by actual brain cells.
this one comes online this year.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:56:00 UTC No. 16105169

>>16105163
Just present him with the Ship of Theseus and have him try to act like he proved what no other philosopher could. At best he might try to become an transcriber of a dead sophist, but he'll look retarded either way. It's beyond silly for this to be a philosophy thread, and people engage with things as it it has not correlation to reality. Philosophy is far from a finished work, yet the potentials of its discussion are not very profound.
I'm sure if I indulge you for long enough, we'll inevitably engage with retarded low complexity dualism that only a low Iq brainlet would find interesting to think about.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:57:01 UTC No. 16105172

>>16105166
You first.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 18:59:07 UTC No. 16105173

>>16105166
Woah guys holy shit, is that a ghost posting on the epic 4chins? What a heckin glitch in the matrix, I better tell leddit!

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:05:47 UTC No. 16105184

>>16105138
>get robowaifu which is completely anatomically female
>insist it's a man somehow

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:10:40 UTC No. 16105192

>>16105184
Robots are objects and therefore are encapable of having a sex, therefore your comment about gender identity doesn't make any sense. The robot is neither male nor female, so it is free to identify as whatever without contradiction.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:11:59 UTC No. 16105196

>>16105192
Holy shit, why is my phone autocorrecting all these words to incorrect spelling? I know for certain that I'm not typing these broken statements, even if I'm not properly proofreading them.

Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:16:54 UTC No. 16105205

>>16105192
Furthermore, mutilating your dick or pushy does not anatomically change your sex. Adding a flashlight to your robot as a function doesn't suddenly make it female in the same sense that cutting off your dick doesn't make you female. You are free to identify as whatever, but it's silly to extend biological terms to pure technocratic manipulation.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 02:59:47 UTC No. 16105793

>>16105130
>No amounts of highly unethical technology will save that experiencer of the flesh. You are going to die.
ok and

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 07:40:07 UTC No. 16105994

>>16100648
>consciousness
The process of creating/manipulating information from noise.

Noise is captured via input from various sources (i.e eye/ears), the noise is then automatically classified according to self similar groups. This creates various categories and which we confuse as entities/selves. One pernicious thing about consciousness process is that we can take a pre-processed event and then separate the event from the self-referenced body. This self-reference is then mistakenly confused as an entity/self.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 07:56:59 UTC No. 16106001

>>16101043
this anon gets it

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 10:00:48 UTC No. 16106069

>>16106001
I know this is a science board, but this board is spiritually dead, but so is most of the population, as has always been. The modern atheist idea that your brain creates you as a totally unique individual who will cease to have any experiences forever is nothing more than a mirror reflection of traditional Abrahamic fairy tales that you have a soul and you can go to paradise to chill with God and your relatives for eternity. Most normies are naive dualists naturally.
It is impossible for egoic human apes to go back to animalistic mode of functioning, so the way forward for our species is to evolve into more insectoid, selfless collective with language completely revamped from the ground up, which does not consider people as "people".

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 10:35:27 UTC No. 16106081

>>16106069
>The modern atheist idea that your brain creates you as a totally unique individual who will cease to have any experiences forever
The fact that the brain creates you doesn't imply atheism. It's not up to any of you to decide that.
Tired of you pieces of shit telling me what I am or what I should be. Or restrict the paths that I can walk.
>if you don't do what I say you are evil
Go fuck yourself. I shit on your dichotomies

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 14:41:40 UTC No. 16106352

>>16104830
It's either that soul exists, or, if you insist of sheer physicalism, identity itself is basically a fake concept, an illusion.
You don't get to live forever in a clone either way.
If you still don't understand it, you are genuinely stupid.

bodhi at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 14:51:06 UTC No. 16106362

none of you pleb faggots ever watched the stargate series's, this is why you know nothing and remain plebs

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 14:53:37 UTC No. 16106365

>>16106352
>my way of thinking is correct
>this other, obviously wrong way of thinking is wrong
>no other ways of thinking exists (according to me)
Were you born stupid, or did you grow into your role?

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 14:57:23 UTC No. 16106367

>>16106362
>i get all my thoughts from entertainment
Imagine being allergic to thinking for yourself.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 16:44:19 UTC No. 16106453

Total NPC Death.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 17:38:48 UTC No. 16106514

>>16106362
Implying that show has an explanation for consciousness.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 17:41:51 UTC No. 16106516

>>16106514
completely unrelated to consciousness that show was pretty nice.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 18:43:47 UTC No. 16106579

An easy way to demonstrate that my copy is not myself even if it contains all of my memories besides the obvious point of divergence is realizing its disallowed for them to occupy the same time and space, let alone identical substrate like material. An individual informationally includes all previous states of an object unto its point of origin, physicalism is very distributed in aging and causality. Thus if I can can clearly make those distinctions between object 1 and object 2, clearly they are not the same object, even if said object claims to identify as an extension of the other. There is no coinflip to the outside observer, and people claiming there is to internal observer require an interruption state beckoned upon the original as if somehow this is necessary to capture a specific state of the mind. One can easily know if they're the clone or not by having any lapse of memory that allowed for an unexplained positional change.

You're all fucking stupid.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 18:49:52 UTC No. 16106590

>>16106579
>You're all fucking stupid.
you sure do seem able to come up with a bunch of un-testable bullshit anon. pseudo science from a pseudo intellectual
when they upload a scanned brain weights/info into neuromorphic hardware, and that dude tells everybody it's really him, it's game over for reactionary pseud zealots.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:05:31 UTC No. 16106606

>>16106590
Nope. That dude is entirely new and separate entity claiming to be an extension of the original and no amount of coping will change that fact. We will likely send billions to the void before their properly timely demise thinking were solving immortality while literal imitations of ourselves go on living our lives. I literally even if participating, won't get to see it, and neither will you. The only thing the responder of this post will face is the void. You will NOT hop to another body. This is a cope and illusion, and even if you try to make it into a reality, it won't stop being that. Get real, you only live once.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:10:25 UTC No. 16106609

>>16106590
Oh and your alternative claim is suddenly so concrete? You literally don't even have a proposed solution to the transference problem and try to flatly dismiss it as irrelevant. As someone who's actually died and came back a few times, I can attest that my consciousness is objectively tied to this physical body and even if it were emerge similarly somewhere else if recreated under remotely similar conditions, the active consciousness tied to this physical body will not suddenly shift or move to it. You aren't actually solving death, yet you're trying to sweep these problems under the rug and convince people it's the correct choice anyways. Are you really that afraid of dying?

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:13:22 UTC No. 16106610

>>16106606
>bla bla stupid shit bla bla
listen, you don't seem to get it. everybody and their dog knows all you weirdos can conjure reasons to deny it, but you being so fucking slow completely miss the fucking essential in fucking science.
make a testable hypothesis. the question is if dude's consciousness transfers. you need to devise a test to test his consciousness and find something missing, so you can argue it doesn't get transfered. in lieu of that you are fucked, all your complaining is irrelevant, because people will just simply ignore it if it works in practice.
every glow agency in the world is going to be messing with it and assemble its freak immortals, if it works in practice. in time that whole lost soul bullshit will become at most a formality that they'll do away with since nobody is fucking complaining. dude making the jump will confirm everything is still there, and once he does it he realizes it's like taking the plane somewhere, it's still you on arrival.
you just don't fucking get it with all that retarded "let me tell you some made up bullshit why it's not real because I actually don't agree with it so gonna pull shit out of my ass"

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:16:39 UTC No. 16106617

>>16106609
>bla bla stupid shit bla bla
see >>16106610

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:21:56 UTC No. 16106625

>>16106610
>if it works in practice

But I just explained precisely why it doesn't. Again if I died multiple times, why did my consciousness remerge specifically and only back into the original body and not a different one? And don't try to sell me on schizo ideas about how I dimension hopped, I have all the physical evidence I need within this universe to prove the events occurred in this one and not some alternative one I tunneled from. If there were some unknown principle of consciousness that allowed it decouple itself from the thing that gave it emergence in the first place, then it would have happened already. Your freak immortals will not be the originals and your solutions are defacto not a solution to death. In order for death to be overcome, you absolutely have to solve the transference problem first. Otherwise you're making an industry of cloning and not actually life extension. Your argument is entirely emotional and irrational and based on desire. My argument is solely based on the rules of reality, thus I'm being far more objective than you.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:22:57 UTC No. 16106626

>>16106617
>blah blah blah stupid shit blah blah
See
>>16106625

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:25:55 UTC No. 16106628

>>16106625
yeah but we all know that your arguments won't matter for shit if dude in cyberbrain says it's him. the moment he says it's really him everything else goes away, all your complaints, if! you have no way to test his consciousness (pro tip: you don't).
all you will be is yet again a bunch of crazies yelling in the street that satan takes your soul if you watch TV. the same old bullshit over and over and it will never fucking stop with anything new that science comes up with and you have no control over. that's what it's fucking always about with you weirdos.
again, your theories don't matter if it works in practice. they are stupid talk about shit that isn't real.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:30:41 UTC No. 16106633

>>16106628
Yes it does because I personally don't want to die and will be using this technology to clone myself as well and I will absolutely be doing so with the certainty that I won't actually be surviving it and my clone will absolutely attest to the fact that they aren't the original.

>and nobody else will complain
I'm complaining right fucking now and I'm not alone. You didn't solve death. You didn't take away my ending, you didn't take away my fear of ending, and if you think I am alone in this perception then you merely need to scroll up. Your arguments haven't once dismissed my facts and you've only ever tried to move goalposts and change topics to make it seem like it isn't relevant. You need to swallow the pill right now that you have no solution to what I've stated so far.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:32:20 UTC No. 16106635

I'm ok if religious people want to ban this technology from other religious people. That should work out just fine.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:33:37 UTC No. 16106637

>>16106633
dude, just don't do it lol. sure, I'm pro choice. you should be able to do whatever teh fuck you want and I'm not joking. would be strange to have some shit shoved down your throat if you have spiritual issues with it.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:43:20 UTC No. 16106648

>>16106637
The choice isn't the point of this discussion, nor is the proposition to abstain from it. The problem is that there is a genuine fundamental desire to overcome death for most of humanity that seeks to be solved, where half solutions shouldn't be considered as the ethical ones we ultimately sought. I understand as a complex system that these things will likely arise anyways, but that doesn't mean we should try to pretend a suicide booth is suddenly a booth to heaven.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:47:52 UTC No. 16106650

>>16106648
ah so you actually want more, you'd like to deny it from other people because you think things about it. how fucking interesting anon.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:49:32 UTC No. 16106652

>>16106648
>we should try to pretend a suicide booth is suddenly a booth to heaven.
what if humans only do it on their deathbed, is that ok with you? they have hours at most left, is that an ok time for them to do it?
or say you 11 year old kid who'd been on fucking chemo and has hours to live? is that an ok time for you anon?

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:52:43 UTC No. 16106656

>>16106650
Of course I want more. I want to become like God and make my own universes of similar or greater complexity. If I were to be digitally recreated the first thing I'd do is start refining the qualities that I consider to transcend the basic hedonistic cycles of living almost immediately. For how could I ever walk upon the surface of the sun if the flames were too great for me to tolerate? I will refine away my pains and pleasures all the same. I find the idea of even being corporeal of having a body at all to be a limitation. I want for so much more than any toddler conception of heaven. My clone will break itself upon the wheel just to better comprehend God on the tip of their finger.

T.agnostic non abrahamist

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:54:41 UTC No. 16106659

>>16106652
Even if you do it, you didn't actually save those people even if you had the intentions to with such a technology. It's a false promise to try to give hope in a universe that you don't understand why it wants you be inflicted with such a condition such as mortality. I still think death ultimately when considering infinite timescales is probably the greatest gift we've ever received. I am thankful for an ending.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:55:08 UTC No. 16106662

>>16106656
I think theoretically you can actually become picrel, given enough sensors and the other required hardware is installed in it.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:56:10 UTC No. 16106664

>>16106659
well yeah sure, but that's just dinner table talk along with the other political bullshit.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:56:43 UTC No. 16106665

>>16106662
I've had this idea of becoming an ai with my core being just a simulated reacreation of my actual body going through extremely abstract physical states akin to being in the lake of fire, while the outputs of such an entity are converted into coherent motions of that system.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:02:12 UTC No. 16106677

>>16106659
>you don't understand why it wants you be inflicted with such a condition such as mortality.
the moment when you "understand" why humans HAVE to die is the moment you become part of a weird deathcult anon, and I'm amazed you don't see it. reading books seems fucking dangerous for some of you freaks. you latch on freaky shit that resonates with the decay in you, and use that as some sort of justification for feeling it.
>hey smart people who wrote some books agree with me

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:08:15 UTC No. 16106684

>>16106677
The closest thing I've ever had to that kind of inspiration was from a welcomic called killsixbilliondemons. It wasn't quite a religion, but it definitely helped me pull my head out of my ass when I lost my mind a few times in my 20's. Rereading today doesn't enrapture it fully for myself anymore as it's still only a creative work at the end of the day. But I definitely get what you mean.

Fanged noumena was a trip too. Still, I think one of the most damaging thing to Academics is to merely parrot or transcribe something you read as absolute fact. While math is great for example, I still view it as a tool and not some absolute representation of reality.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:10:44 UTC No. 16106688

>>16106677
I wrote a joke for you, I hope you enjoy it.

"Existence is not axiomatic to human thought. I do not think, therefore I am not."

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:20:35 UTC No. 16106698

>>16106684
we're in a chicken and egg problem. billions have to die because humans become wretched because shit conditions and need for their work. but applying tech might change things in a way in which humans stop doing as much bad shit.
always using the past or present to justify why things shouldn't change is not as smart as it sounds.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:29:20 UTC No. 16106721

>>16106698
If said tech is able to overcome the fundamental problems it has on a conceptual level, then perhaps it can create better conditions for the still biologically living. However I've yet to hear a proposition for transference problem that wasn't just "hey if the consciousness arises out of the body, why not replace the brain sequentially with artifical versions of itself until eventually years later the person has fully working digital brain to be uploaded". And I'm sure even you can pick apart that solution and see how it might not work.

Believe me, I want something like this to be figured out, but I have doubts that it will be based on intuition and current understanding.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:33:23 UTC No. 16106731

>>16106721
I shit you not I think it's as simple as and nothing else. It was always in our faces. We always look at it in the mirror. That's what's actually funny. I started laughing when it clicked

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:35:30 UTC No. 16106736

>>16106731 me
>I started laughing when it clicked
literally picrel >>16100648

bodhi at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:40:44 UTC No. 16106743

>>16106367
imagine being so autistic you are incapable of understanding what jokes are and on top of that being retarded enough to call other people NPCs.


>>16106516
wrong, literally every single show covered "ascension." The orig SG! not til the later seasons but SGA and SGU almost exclusively. You havent even seen them or you would never make a claim that is so blatantly false on its face

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:42:08 UTC No. 16106745

>>16106731
Okay, well. I've had pretty extreme life experiences on the subject of esoterics and abstraction on top of death for reasons I'm not fully comfortable communicating with you. I am very confident on the rules of reality to the point where I nearly turned myself into a fine red paste trying to defeat a wall with simple motion many times over. I have even managed some strange memetic results that left me bewildered to this day that I've had to accept. When I tell you that this body and life is the only one that you'll be able to experience in THIS world and universe, I genuinely mean it.

You could summon an interdimensional portal in front of me and I'd shrug it off as dull and interesting by the means of which I've lived so far. Dare I even say I might have been one of the few types of schizos to hit wizard tier. Your mind is stuck to this form. You can even leave this realm for a lifetime of experienced years, with a new name and new life and experience that life out in it entirety. Yet the moment it is over, if you weren't finished yet in THIS body, you will absolutely find yourself back here and spun out tier disoriented and confused. When this body is done, it's void time.


Tl:Dr I'm shitposting, but half seriously because my life has actually been that crazy.

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:45:01 UTC No. 16106751

>>16106743
>wrong, literally every single show covered "ascension." The orig SG! not til the later seasons but SGA and SGU almost exclusively. You havent even seen them or you would never make a claim that is so blatantly false on its face
bro chill, I was young and barely remember shit. I know military dudes went into stargates on other planets and shit would happen. didn't mean to insult fucking Stargate

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:49:06 UTC No. 16106759

>>16106745
there is some fuckery with this reality, I'll give you that. still that doesn't automatically mean some very particular things. brain is so good at piecing things together. that combined with indeed some sort of fuckery might get you off track, many such cases.

bodhi at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:50:10 UTC No. 16106761

>>16106751
I am chill, just saying. WHy would you say something blatantly false like that then? Here enjoy lil ninja
https://fmoviesz.to/filter?keyword=stargate

I just marathoned SGU (Stargate Universe) the last 2 days and that shit was fire son

Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 21:02:44 UTC No. 16106775

>>16106761
I literally excluded any consciousness related rating from my statement because I had no idea about it, that's how I meant that statement. I was saying that I can't speak for the consciousness part of it, but I liked the sci-fi show for the exploring other worlds bit.
might check it out again, see it with older brain

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 00:53:58 UTC No. 16107098

>>16106743
Hahaha, wow that was such a good joke, anon!
Here, let me tell one: the television is always right!
HAHAHAHAHAHA ISN'T THAT HILARIOUS?! HAHAHAHAHA

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 02:24:15 UTC No. 16107196

>>16106635
what technology? it will never exist.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 02:27:21 UTC No. 16107204

>>16107196
lol wat it comes online this year >>16105168
and this is what is publicly known. who knows what other shit happens behind closed doors.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 02:32:16 UTC No. 16107207

>>16107196
and I remember seeing some tech reaching synapse level but there's quite a few ways of doing it to some resolution
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-among-techniques-The-temporal-and-spatial-resolution-of-methods-for-studying_fig2_7375310
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Different-brain-imaging-modalities-and-their-spatial-and-temporal-resolutions-For_fig1_225279502

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 11:23:55 UTC No. 16107626

>>16100648
The Qualion is the force carrier of consciousness.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 11:47:39 UTC No. 16107654

>>16103128
It's possible, just not for (You).

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 11:56:31 UTC No. 16107658

>>16103830
>If we aren’t our body (we are, as I freely admit, also simultaneously "just" that dream subjectivity you mention. It’s a subset relation), then why would we wake up upon water being sprinkled over your body during sleep? You may say because the brain generates an saliency impulse that reaches your dream self — but see what happened here. The brain has undertaken an action divorced from your dream self. In what way is a certain brain pathway about reaction to cold water embedded inside that minimal self of pure awareness you are getting at?
1. Coma patients don't react to such things, despite exhibiting brain activity.
2. Heavy sleepers don't react to such things, same deal.
3. The existence of a bidirectional interaction between qualia and neurochemical doesn't explicitly mean they're one and the same, in much the same vein that the feedback loop between the screen I'm looking at and the keys I press to create this message doesn't make the computer "me".

If you take a radio and turn it on, it sounds off a broadcast. If you then take that radio, and you smash it, does the constituent signal go away, or did you just destroy the hardware? Side note, despite mentioning brain activity here, I hate when people use fMRI scans and the like to try and point to brain areas as concrete evidence of localization of experience/origins of behaviour, I get why it's alluring but it's terrible science, you can get fMRI data out of a dead salmon if you try hard enough.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 12:01:59 UTC No. 16107660

>>16105011
>I am one of the smartest people on this planet with an Iq 147, so if I didn't get it, then it's a you problem, not a me problem.
All this tells us is that you're probably autistic, anon.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:33:08 UTC No. 16107795

test

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 17:59:46 UTC No. 16108006

>>16100977
The brain is not an abstracted computing device, as such an accurate simulation will likely need to go down the atomic level, which will never be possible.

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 19:36:08 UTC No. 16108139

>>16106659
>I still think death ultimately when considering infinite timescales is probably the greatest gift we've ever received
well I am not doing anything, there's a fuckload of universities and all kinds of entities working into it anon. I'm just a fucking NEET, I can't afford the extension cord they use to plug their computer into the wall lmao.
you have your ideas about death, they stop with you. same as my ideas about death, they stop with me. as in I am not forcing you to accept my idea of death. you do whatever the fuck you want, I do whatever the fuck I want.
but the way I understand it now, death is not real, it doesn't exist. what you and almost all humans call death, call it as a consequence, not because you had access to some special knowledge coming outside this universe. your brain concocted the best coping story, which worked evolutionary speaking. you understand death from observing humans not getting up after their bodies get fucked. you call THAT death, inactive body.
this dynamic, made for all sorts of weird shit and stories, and philosophies. because that is what you always ever had, once body is fucked no more that person.
so much so, coming back started being seen as reserved for gods. because humans couldn't do it. ever.
but, humans who came up with all the ideas and philosophies, did what they did based on the information they had SO FAR. they couldn't have considered all the information about it, because they didn't have access to it. like they didn't know the earth is round for a long ass time, because they had no reason to come up with such a fucking idea. once information started seeping in, it became impossible to consider otherwise.
back then, shit was the same as now, flat earth meant something deeper, spiritually, religiously, we were the center of it all. all of a sudden, we were faced with the fact that we aren't actually.
so now, the concept of death is being challenged, the most primitive of them will chimp the fuck out

Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 23:46:00 UTC No. 16108510

nice article on the topic, lots of money into it:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-tried-to-re-create-an-entire-human-brain-in-a-computer-what-happened/