Is it possible to upload our minds into a computer or in engineered living tissue?

[Ravenshire]

If I were none the wiser, why would I care that it's not really "me?"

You ever seen TNG: Second Chances?

Nope. Never could get into TNG. I really wish I could find the hard copy (lost during a move) of the short story I wrote using this premise though...

Really though, if there's no way of knowing, what would be the difference?

[Whateverist]

Hah hah.  My beliefs on this subject very nearly mirror those regarding traditional notions of afterlife: don't think so/ don't care.

So why make a thread about it? 

I enjoy taking the wet blanket role in the debate.

[The Grand Nudger]

Unless the data can be transposed 1 for 1 to the new medium and is consistent amongst all or most subjects....interpretation would be dicey. Ship of theseus territory, ofc.

[Whateverist]

*predicts stages of this thread
.
.
7. A certain someone will chime-in "Why would our consciousness die when as we can see in nature nothing die?

Yes.  It is plain to see the consciousness will never die.     


So all these 'objective' scientists will be wasting their time for what?    

[Angrboda]

Would the new copy have legal rights to your estate? I think not, so it not being you wouldn't matter, unless the copy were completely indistinguishable, body and brain.

[The Grand Nudger]

What do we do /w the originals...is it off to the meatgrinder, lol?  What happens in a dispute between the original and the copy?  Can you murder yourself, or would it be considered suicide, or even less, property damage, or maybe it would be seen as akin to getting a piercing? Theres little restriction as to what we can do with our own bodies, even if it incurs harm.
(I finally had an idea for a book, just in time for nanowrimo, yall rock)

[Whateverist]

What do we do /w the originals...is it off to the meatgrinder, lol?  What happens in a dispute between the original and the copy?  Can you murder yourself, or would it be considered suicide, or even less, property damage, or maybe it would be seen as akin to getting a piercing?  Theres little restriction as to what we can do with our own bodies, even if it incurs harm.
(I finally had an idea for a book, just in time for nanowrimo, yall rock)

It might be best to trade mark protect these ideas, just in case.

[Whateverist]

Would the new copy have legal rights to your estate?  I think not, so it not being you wouldn't matter, unless the copy were completely indistinguishable, body and brain.

For myself, I can imagine inheriting might be permissible. Of course, if I can leave my estate to my dog .. why not to a recreation of 'me' which is good enough for me?

I actually like the idea of moving beyond the could you/couldn't you part of the debate and consider what it would mean if you could.  There would be repercussions for society if the Koch brothers are never separated from their fortune and they continue to accrue a larger and larger piece of the pie.  I am not optimistic about the possibility of our species to improve politically in the way the Star Trek series assume.  

The first question I wonder about if we accept that it eventually becomes mechanically possible is: would it be desirable?  Part of the mind/self which we are considering extending has evolved for a mortal existence.  How much drive would anyone feel to accomplish anything if it could just as easily wait another 800 years?  Personally I don't burn for immortality.  Would the world be a more interesting place if no or few new mortal humans were needed since those born with the choice chose to continue themselves instead?

[The Grand Nudger]

There would be repercussions for society if the Koch brothers are never separated from their fortune and they continue to accrue a larger and larger piece of the pie.

That consequence, and that scenario already exists, without any fancy smansy clones.  Wealth is -and has been- condensing, for some time now, around those already wealthy.  

The first question I wonder about if we accept that it eventually becomes mechanically possible is: would it be desirable?

Probably an individual position...for me, no, for someone else, I can see the allure.

Part of the mind/self which we are considering extending has evolved for a mortal existence.  How much drive would anyone feel to accomplish anything if it could just as easily wait another 800 years?

We're already procrastinators.  If things actually -could- wait another 800 years I bet we'd all end up getting more done, individually.  The reason, often enough, that we don;t get those things done is that it -can't- wait another 800 years.

Personally I don't burn for immortality.  Would the world be a more interesting place if no or few new mortal humans were needed since those born with the choice chose to continue themselves instead?

Those born with the means...don't forget the means.  When they roll out immortobots, guys like the Kochs will get them, not you and I.  What do you think...if people like the Kochs condensed and became over-representative in the way that their wealth currently does (and -because- of their wealth, no less)...would that be a more interesting world to you?  I don;t think so.  I think that it would be a petty and boring world.  Our mortality and diversity is the spice of life, imo.

[Pyrrho]

There is a recent thread on this topic:

Let's create an eternal blissful life through science

I don't think it will ever be possible, for reasons specified in that thread.  Nor do I think it would be desirable even if it were possible.  For reasons specified in that thread.