Not all messages are displayed:
show all messages (99 of them)
xp seems morally legit to me to do that. The destruction is only in appearance, there's not really a 'new' nor 'old' entity in any sense that i'd like to have to argue.
― hipstery nayme (darraghmac), Friday, 9 September 2011 16:15 (twelve years ago) link
'ethically untenable' wtf cmon i know this is just for shits and giggles but ethics? Really?
What about the saving on carbon monoxides, then? Eh?
― hipstery nayme (darraghmac), Friday, 9 September 2011 16:17 (twelve years ago) link
I don't see how you can say that. If you split in half and then half of you has 20 years of life experience -- marries, has children, works, creates art, etc -- and then at the end of the 20 years you decide to shut him down, how is that distinct from killing a non-clone?
― Mordy, Friday, 9 September 2011 16:18 (twelve years ago) link
Feel free to answer the question from whatever perspective you want! I personally find the ethical dimension the more interesting part.
― Mordy, Friday, 9 September 2011 16:20 (twelve years ago) link
oh, that was more about why someone might feel uncomfortable w/ being disintegrated. robin hanson is less interested in ethics than why ppl feel the way they do about stuff.
― Mordy, Friday, 9 September 2011 16:26 (twelve years ago) link
Ahh, this got going again, excellent.
a) I do feel the need to point out that the only question I really took a position on was the third - I'm not advocating the burning/ownership of your clone, I'm just suggesting that it's an interesting area to explore. As you have proved by engaging with it rather than dismissing it, Mordy, heh.
b) There's no choice involved; you as much go into the pit as get teleported.
I think this is being interpreted in different ways by people. Split/simultaneous consciousness = 'you x as much go into the pit as you x get teleported'. Split/separate consciousness = both yous are you, but you consciousness x go into the pit as much as you consciousness y get teleported. Both interpretations are valid from the sentence, but I think split/separate was backed up more by the original poster.
c) I don't actually have time for c as I have to get ready to go DJ, but I will come back to this tomorrow. Mordy's raised some good extra points here.
― emil.y, Friday, 9 September 2011 17:27 (twelve years ago) link