Afterlife, digital copies or clones

[jmccr8]

5 hours ago, eight bits said:

@Mr Walker

From the "chalk Virgin Mary" thread (edited down to the good parts):

On topic here; off-topic there.

Thanks Eight Bits

The Walkerdrome is open for business.

jmccr8

[Free99]

Consciousness Is so much more than most will ever realize. Let me give you a idea of how I visualize it working out.

If we could record a complete replica of you’re mind right now and I mean everything in it since day one that’s not consciousness. It’s a replica of who you were. Let’s say we took that and put it into the artificial mind of 10 different androids and set them free into the world one by one. Would they be you? Would they make the same choices you would? At the end of the day a decade from now would they be doing what you would be doing? What about 25 years from now? Each one would evolve into someone different. 
Just the thought of this can turn into a massive amount of writing just trying to explain it. But let’s dig deeper into the idea of Consciousness. What if we recorded the life of a single child day by day and placed these recordings into an artificial intelligence program? Memories that both intelligence and Personality build upon. At the age of say 21 we flip a switch and transfer this 21 years worth of knowledge into one android. Would they be like you? As each day passes the thin red line is about drag one more person over the line. 
Consciousness is a Whole different can of works. Artificial intelligence in yet but another.

[psyche101]

4 hours ago, Free99 said:

Consciousness Is so much more than most will ever realize. Let me give you a idea of how I visualize it working out.

If we could record a complete replica of you’re mind right now and I mean everything in it since day one that’s not consciousness. It’s a replica of who you were. Let’s say we took that and put it into the artificial mind of 10 different androids and set them free into the world one by one. Would they be you? Would they make the same choices you would? At the end of the day a decade from now would they be doing what you would be doing? What about 25 years from now? Each one would evolve into someone different. 
Just the thought of this can turn into a massive amount of writing just trying to explain it. But let’s dig deeper into the idea of Consciousness. What if we recorded the life of a single child day by day and placed these recordings into an artificial intelligence program? Memories that both intelligence and Personality build upon. At the age of say 21 we flip a switch and transfer this 21 years worth of knowledge into one android. Would they be like you? As each day passes the thin red line is about drag one more person over the line. 
Consciousness is a Whole different can of works. Artificial intelligence in yet but another.

Most likely, consciousness is a set of evolved reactions. The sum of one's experiences.

It depends on the mainframe. If they are compatible, it would be you I think. If I made several copies of myself with a miraculous human copying machine right now, that were all decidedly me, I don't think every copy of me would make the same choices. I don't think that stops me being me, it's what I would do anyway if I had several options. Sometimes it's hard to decide what to do. In those instances, I couldn't say I'd make the same decision every time. 

Edited October 21, 2020 by psyche101

[jmccr8]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Most likely, consciousness is a set of evolved reactions. The sum of one's experiences.

It depends on the mainframe. If they are compatible, it would be you I think. If I made several copies of myself with a miraculous human copying machine right now, that were all decidedly me, I don't think every copy of me would make the same choices. I don't think that stops me being me, it's what I would do anyway if I had several options. Sometimes it's hard to decide what to do. In those instances, I couldn't say I'd make the same decision every time. 

Hi Psyche

There are a lot of variables like living environments and at what age the subject was cloned, if each clone is living in different environments the conditions and opportunities then each of them may have developed different skill sets. If a person was cloned at 15-20 years  or later at 40-60 years old the potential for greater variation changes because of life experience. I don't know if making multiple copies of oneself at the same time is a good idea either but the at this time we have no data to make judgements on so basically all we have is subjective opinion.

I should add that I have been making clones from plants and yes they are all healthy buy do see differences in how each plant develops and they are not identical to each other but are the same plant.

jmccr8

Edited October 21, 2020 by jmccr8
added context

[eight bits]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I don't think every copy of me would make the same choices.

In some sense, that's gotta be true, right? I am me, and I disagree with some of the choices I've made - maybe even some of the choices I'm making currently.

Carl Jung loved the idea that lots of people argued with themselves. Well, whoever that is inside me who thinks a second helping of ice cream is a bad idea could have his way if one of the copies of me let him. Meh - his loss. Now, about that ice cream, ...

[+Liquid Gardens]

5 minutes ago, eight bits said:

In some sense, that's gotta be true, right? I am me, and I disagree with some of the choices I've made - maybe even some of the choices I'm making currently.

I think it depends on when the decision point is occurring post-duplication.  Wouldn't they also disagree with some choices 'you've' made and choices you are making currently in the exact same way, and thus end up making the same choices as you?  I think as soon as the copies start accumulating differing experiences from each other then different choices would emerge, but at t-plus 1 second from their emergence from psyche's magic duplication machine, I think they're all going for that ice cream (or are all not).

[XenoFish]

14 hours ago, Free99 said:

Consciousness Is so much more than most will ever realize. Let me give you a idea of how I visualize it working out.

If we could record a complete replica of you’re mind right now and I mean everything in it since day one that’s not consciousness. It’s a replica of who you were. Let’s say we took that and put it into the artificial mind of 10 different androids and set them free into the world one by one. Would they be you? Would they make the same choices you would? At the end of the day a decade from now would they be doing what you would be doing? What about 25 years from now? Each one would evolve into someone different. 
Just the thought of this can turn into a massive amount of writing just trying to explain it. But let’s dig deeper into the idea of Consciousness. What if we recorded the life of a single child day by day and placed these recordings into an artificial intelligence program? Memories that both intelligence and Personality build upon. At the age of say 21 we flip a switch and transfer this 21 years worth of knowledge into one android. Would they be like you? As each day passes the thin red line is about drag one more person over the line. 
Consciousness is a Whole different can of works. Artificial intelligence in yet but another.

Not saying you copied, but it does look familiar.

 

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

There are a lot of variables like living environments and at what age the subject was cloned, if each clone is living in different environments the conditions and opportunities then each of them may have developed different skill sets. If a person was cloned at 15-20 years  or later at 40-60 years old the potential for greater variation changes because of life experience. I don't know if making multiple copies of oneself at the same time is a good idea either but the at this time we have no data to make judgements on so basically all we have is subjective opinion.

Agreed, but doesn't that very opinion, being subjective, indicate that even an individual would take advantage of many choices?

Like the idea of multiple universes, some have come up with ideas of a multiple you in multiple universes living out infinite possibilities based on choices available to us. This would be a similar situation I would think? 

9 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

I should add that I have been making clones from plants and yes they are all healthy buy do see differences in how each plant develops and they are not identical to each other but are the same plant.

jmccr8

I would expect so though, differing nutrients based on exactly where they lie in the soil, slightly different exposure to sunlight, tiny things that affect the plant entirely, something like choices made available to us?

[psyche101]

8 hours ago, eight bits said:

In some sense, that's gotta be true, right? I am me, and I disagree with some of the choices I've made - maybe even some of the choices I'm making currently.

Carl Jung loved the idea that lots of people argued with themselves. Well, whoever that is inside me who thinks a second helping of ice cream is a bad idea could have his way if one of the copies of me let him. Meh - his loss. Now, about that ice cream, ...

Lol, Jung would have loved my mind then, it's very busy. I wish it would shut up sometimes. Ive made plenty of life choices that I regret, none over ice cream though, that's a unanimous cheer in my brain. Some things are too great to question. 

Most say, I'd love be to be able to live my life again with what I know now. But a copy wouldn't know, would I always pick rum n raisin over strawberry cream? I think at some point the curiosity would break, but I think it could be a different points in my timeline. But it's still me. 

[jmccr8]

59 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Agreed, but doesn't that very opinion, being subjective, indicate that even an individual would take advantage of many choices?

Hi Psyche

Yes exactly the point a clone is under no obligation to be exactly the same as it's source code so to speak although Walker thinks that his clones would be cookie cutter copies of himself.

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

I would expect so though, differing nutrients based on exactly where they lie in the soil, slightly different exposure to sunlight, tiny things that affect the plant entirely, something like choices made available to us?

Yes , that can happen but even grown under the same conditions there is enough variation with the plants that I can see them as individuals. I use the same potting soil and plant food and lights and the light cycles are on timers so there is a lot of consistency in environment. 

jmccr8

[jmccr8]

 Lol I was just thinking that seeing as how Walker doesn't want to come to his thread we can all hang out here and discuss his stories, maybe for giggles we can take turns being Walker and spin some yarns and defensive monologues with humor.

jmccr8

 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Yes exactly the point a clone is under no obligation to be exactly the same as it's source code so to speak although Walker thinks that his clones would be cookie cutter copies of himself.

Agreed, to many choices. Impossible to ensure the same one would definitely be made twice in every case. 

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Yes , that can happen but even grown under the same conditions there is enough variation with the plants that I can see them as individuals. I use the same potting soil and plant food and lights and the light cycles are on timers so there is a lot of consistency in environment. 

jmccr8

I wonder is this is also the case with cloned animals? Do they begin to diversify immediately?

[DingoLingo]

On 11/13/2019 at 1:20 PM, Sherapy said:

I have a question for the boys, Jay, Third, Xeno, 8 bit, hammer, and  Psyche do you guys ever feel fear and are you okay to admit it?

ok so I am nearly a year late

I do not feel fear.. at all.. since I had a stroke

Bit of a interesting read about a woman with a rare brain disorder.. I remember reading about her a few years ago

https://www.wired.com/2010/12/fear-brain-amygdala/#:~:text=SM has an unusual genetic,no fear%2C the researchers found.

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Agreed, to many choices. Impossible to ensure the same one would definitely be made twice in every case. 

I wonder is this is also the case with cloned animals? Do they begin to diversify immediately?

Hi Psyche

Not sure but it seems to me that some may have the same markings but in a different color I will look and see what I find and let you know.

jmccr8

Edited October 22, 2020 by jmccr8

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I wonder is this is also the case with cloned animals? Do they begin to diversify immediately?

Hi Psyhche

Just took a quick look and yes I did remember correctly.

https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/animal-cloning/myths-about-cloning#:~:text=to the top-,Myth%3A Clones are always identical in looks.,the identical twin calves again.

Myth: Clones are always identical in looks.

Not necessarily. In fact, many clones have slight variations in coat color and markings.

Let’s think about the identical twin calves again. They have the same genes, but look a little different. That’s because of the way those genes are expressed—that is, how the information in that gene is seen in the actual animal. For example, if they’re Holstein cows, the pattern of their spots, or the shape of their ears may be different. Human identical twins also have the same genes, but because those genes are expressed differently in each person, they have different freckle and fingerprint patterns.

Myth: Clones have exactly the same temperament and personality as the animals from which they were cloned.

Temperament is only partly determined by genetics; a lot has to do with the way an animal has been raised. It’s the old “nature versus nurture” argument.

Say you want to clone your horse because of his gentle and sweet temperament. Although your horse’s clone may be easy-going, he would have to have exactly the same life experiences as your original horse in order to have the same temperament.

Your original horse isn’t afraid of loud noises because his experiences have taught him that they won’t hurt him. But if your clone has a bad experience with loud noises (for instance, a tree branch falls on him in a loud thunderstorm and hurts him), he may associate loud noises with pain and be afraid of them.

https://drsophiayin.com/blog/entry/cloning-cats-rainbow-and-cc-prove-that-cloning-wont-resurrect-your-pet/

Even with the most recent advances in veterinary medicine, your beloved cat won’t live forever, but is the next best thing just around the corner? Will it someday be possible to resurrect your cat with cloning?

Nearly a decade ago, on December 22, 2001, scientists at Texas A&M University announced the birth of CC, the world’s first cloned cat. CC, as in Copy Cat, has the same DNA blueprint as her genetic mother, Rainbow. So, like identical twins they share the same genetic code. That means everything’s the same—their looks, their mannerisms, their…. But wait.

 

Although Rainbow and her clone, CC, have identical genes, Rainbow is calico in color while CC is a tiger tabby and has no orange

 

A closer view in color reveals they don’t actually look identical. In fact, technically they’re not even the same color. Rainbow, with her spackling of orange mixed in with patches of black accentuated by a white belly and legs is calico while CC, who has no orange coloring at all, is a tiger-tabby. Is CC really a clone or is this another example of what some scientists call the Jurassic phenomenon?

 

Maybe with 3d printing there would be more control for human use in the future but as we were saying that they would not necessarily react or develop the same characteristics as the original.

jmccr8

Edited October 22, 2020 by jmccr8
added context

[jmccr8]

(quote from Walker)

I doubt anyone can accurately  imagine humanity in even 2000 years let alone 10000 Too many changes and unknowns intervene.   However, out to about 300 years both can be reasonably accurately predicted/extrapolated, allowing for some unknown events and variables   Just as one thing the worlds population will be MUCH smaller then than now 

eg

quote

longer term prediction

Even as the six billionth human is born, it's time to forget fears about the world being overpopulated. By the end of the next millennium, Tokyo will be a ghost town, and Japan will be empty. The country's population will be just 500 by the year 3000, and just one by 3500. When that person dies, the Japanese nation will be no more.

These apocalyptic predictions aren't the rantings of a doomsday cult, or of a maverick academic out to gain some publicity, but of the Japanese government itself. Its Ministry of Health and Welfare reports: 'If we dare make the calculation, Japan's population will be about 500 people by the year 3000.'

Hi Walker

Not sure you read your post but it is more than 300 years til the year 3000 and an extra 500 til 3500 and and you are making claims of population decline when you clearly stated at the beginning of your post that you doubt anyone can accurately imagine humanity in even 2000 years however about 300 years can be easily extrapolated.

This is the same kind of weak(confused)  arguments that you make all the time only you can accurately predict the future because you dreamed you astral travel and create fictitious events which is fine if you are talking to yourself and you are not.

jmccr8

 

Edited October 22, 2020 by jmccr8
spulling

[jmccr8]

Nup I will stop responding, only when people stop making unfounded and unsupported statements about me.  Otherwise there will be  post after post of personal comment and criticism, without a single piece of evidence to support it. You are asking me to ignore this, or respond to  it in a post not connected to the debate, leaving  the  field to my opponents

if others stuck to the topic, (rather than making me the issue)  and to the natural evolution of a discussion, this would not occur. 

Hi Walker

Bring your defence here where it is on topic. As you can see several of us are talking about you and your constructs and you seem to be MIA have you been wounded or are you laying dead on the battlefield? Not to worry I have sent out a search and rescue team with medics.

jmccr8

[onlookerofmayhem]

59 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

This is the same kind of weak(confused)  arguments that you make all the time

Same as when I said nobody could survive for hours with no artificial breathing help at the bottom of my pool.

He proceeded to link a few stories of extremely different circumstances in which individuals (all toddlers or small children) fell into very cold water (which allows their small bodies to rapidly drop in temperature) for less than an hour and were revived. One link claimed 66 minutes, but that only said the girl drowned in a creek, not 8 feet underwater. It's not specified if she was face down, on the shore or washed up on a rock.

My pool was 63 degrees the day I posted the hypothetical. 

The person being removed from the water and resuscitated by medical personnel is irrelevant when I specified "unaided."

I'm not sure how examples of under an hour extrapolate into hours. That would mean at the very least two hours.

And I'm not sure where that extrapolation would end. If 42 mintues then hours. If hours then days. If days then weeks.

I just wanted to point this incident out. I have no interest in continuing the discussion here. 

And @jmccr8 thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy of him contradicting his own argumentation within the link he provided.

[DingoLingo]

Ok when it comes to cloning or digital copies.. even if they were 100% exact copies of yourself.. they will end up as a different version of yourself.. its our experiences through life that make us.. 

Lets go with Peter F Hamilton's versions of cloning and digital life (great author btw)

Everyone has a chip in their head that they upload their day to day life onto the cloud.. when you die a blank clone of you is created your memories from the cloud are downloaded into the clone.. while it is a exact copy of you and your memories have no recall of dying you will then live with the knowledge of you having died.. that is something that you yourself do not have.. but your clone does.. 

Or lets say there is a chance to head off into the stars.. you really want to go but you cannot because of family.. so you clone yourself.. either you or your clone heads into space while the other stays on earth.. they would be separate people.. for one will have the life in space.. the other on earth.. and a digital life would be the same.. 

[jmccr8]

On 11/25/2019 at 12:25 AM, Mr Walker said:

My donors HAVE no memories or self  aware consciousness  The mind did not exist  in the body of these clones. 

Hi Walker

Have been going over the thread to refresh our discussion when I came across this post.

Where did you find your mindless bodies, I looked on Amazon.ca and couldn't find any?

jmccr8

[psyche101]

21 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Not sure but it seems to me that some may have the same markings but in a different color I will look and see what I find and let you know.

jmccr8

That's interesting, whilst there are physical variations, the link says that if the clone had exactly the same experience it would have the same temperament. 

[+Razman]

If they could upload our conscious into the cloud , it might be more like an afterlife.

[psyche101]

5 minutes ago, razman said:

If they could upload our conscious into the cloud , it might be more like an afterlife.

How would that compare to the classical idea?

[jmccr8]

28 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That's interesting, whilst there are physical variations, the link says that if the clone had exactly the same experience it would have the same temperament. 

Hi Psyche

Genetically they are the same and the article does say that genetics is part of temperament but if the animal had exactly the same experiences that the would develop in the same manner. I think it would be difficult to create those same influences though because animals have experiences when we are not there and may not know how or what influenced certain reactions.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

19 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Genetically they are the same and the article does say that genetics is part of temperament but if the animal had exactly the same experiences that the would develop in the same manner. I think it would be difficult to create those same influences though because animals have experiences when we are not there and may not know how or what influenced certain reactions.

jmccr8

It may be difficult , but it seems if the previous link is accurate, theoretically possible. What tends to indivualise beings is gene expression. That's triggered by external factors like drugs, chemicals, temperature, and light. I'm wondering if the effects are more sensitive than we realise, or is there another part to this equation?