So ok this reminds me of a pro atheist argument. So you concede that straightforward tech advances an automation can probably fix everything but brain degradation. And hypothetically suppose someone demonstrated some method of partial brain repair. (Neural stem cells, gene edits to turn off aging mechanisms, replacing non neuron support cells with deaged replacements made by deaging and editing the mutations on a single pluripotent stem cell then differentiating it). So that cuts the problem in half, as at least half the cells in the brain motile and replaceable.
Then of course there’s the implants. Theoretically they can replace any function and there are some successful experiments in rats.
And like ok, so someone’s memories are in implants and their brain continues to degrade. Do you think there is some measurable cognitive capacity you can’t restore? When I think of this problem, I think of a VR world made with generative ai, and injected into the narrative are continuous cognitive tests for a variety of functions. So as a patient starts to perform poorly on some tests, more implants are installed, new structures are grown with stem cells (their brain might take on an alien shape and be several times present size to fit all these modifications). This happens until the scores on all tests reach a target baseline
It’s a continuous process. Because they keep reflecting on their original life and personality as the process happens, at all times the patient retains their original personality, human level cognitive capacity, and most declarative memories though there will be errors that get corrected by checking records.
So I mean...at age 100 probably every memory before 50 is a copy made by recall. Nothing is original. And age 150, same for the (100,150) interval. And so on for eternity.
So what I challenge you to find is some definition of death that lets the 250 year old be dead but doesn’t let you define a 100 year old...or 50 year old....as deceased.
I will note that my own views are that it’s a continuous process, it’s possible for someone to be partially dead. With enough technology you can prevent someone from being completely dead for at least a billion years. I just think of it as number in the interval (0, 1). 0 means their body was incinerated and any journals burned, 1.0 is today. Yesterday is 0.99999....i think humans “die” over time regardless of still breathing because a small amount of information is being lost. The loss only stops with neural implants and backed up files.
So that cuts the problem in half, as at least half the cells in the brain motile and replaceable.
I don’t think so. It may solve for 90% of the body’s mass, or even a large percentage of neurons, without making very much progress on the hard part of maintaining cognitive ability and continuity. I (and we) don’t know enough detail of what makes human brains work to have any clue whether it’s actually solvable in existing brains, which haven’t already developed with monitoring and electronic access.
And with that, I think I’ll bow out. Thanks for the discussion—I’ll read further posts and rebuttals, but probably won’t reply.
Ok. Just one note, I did address memory later in the same comment above. You can grow new brain structures, digitally connect them, and they will learn over time the traits of the dying “original” networks they are mimicking. Note we do this all the time in ANNs.
Another meta comment is I am like explaining how you could use a big steam engine made of brass to reach 60mph in a train. I don’t know of better techniques either. I am saying “well you could bolt the patients skull to a fixed point, expose the brain, and add additional structures to copy and augment it to restore lost capabilities.”
I don’t believe such a crude solution will be necessary, I just don’t know anything better with today’s tech base, and I am saying that this will work eventually. Your belief that “death always wins” would be like people in 1910 believing “aircraft will always crash”. Technically true but the rate matters, with methodical refinement and midair refueling and component replacement you can make an aircraft fly for centuries or longer before it crashes.
So ok this reminds me of a pro atheist argument. So you concede that straightforward tech advances an automation can probably fix everything but brain degradation. And hypothetically suppose someone demonstrated some method of partial brain repair. (Neural stem cells, gene edits to turn off aging mechanisms, replacing non neuron support cells with deaged replacements made by deaging and editing the mutations on a single pluripotent stem cell then differentiating it). So that cuts the problem in half, as at least half the cells in the brain motile and replaceable.
Then of course there’s the implants. Theoretically they can replace any function and there are some successful experiments in rats.
And like ok, so someone’s memories are in implants and their brain continues to degrade. Do you think there is some measurable cognitive capacity you can’t restore? When I think of this problem, I think of a VR world made with generative ai, and injected into the narrative are continuous cognitive tests for a variety of functions. So as a patient starts to perform poorly on some tests, more implants are installed, new structures are grown with stem cells (their brain might take on an alien shape and be several times present size to fit all these modifications). This happens until the scores on all tests reach a target baseline
It’s a continuous process. Because they keep reflecting on their original life and personality as the process happens, at all times the patient retains their original personality, human level cognitive capacity, and most declarative memories though there will be errors that get corrected by checking records.
So I mean...at age 100 probably every memory before 50 is a copy made by recall. Nothing is original. And age 150, same for the (100,150) interval. And so on for eternity.
So what I challenge you to find is some definition of death that lets the 250 year old be dead but doesn’t let you define a 100 year old...or 50 year old....as deceased.
I will note that my own views are that it’s a continuous process, it’s possible for someone to be partially dead. With enough technology you can prevent someone from being completely dead for at least a billion years. I just think of it as number in the interval (0, 1). 0 means their body was incinerated and any journals burned, 1.0 is today. Yesterday is 0.99999....i think humans “die” over time regardless of still breathing because a small amount of information is being lost. The loss only stops with neural implants and backed up files.
I don’t think so. It may solve for 90% of the body’s mass, or even a large percentage of neurons, without making very much progress on the hard part of maintaining cognitive ability and continuity. I (and we) don’t know enough detail of what makes human brains work to have any clue whether it’s actually solvable in existing brains, which haven’t already developed with monitoring and electronic access.
And with that, I think I’ll bow out. Thanks for the discussion—I’ll read further posts and rebuttals, but probably won’t reply.
Ok. Just one note, I did address memory later in the same comment above. You can grow new brain structures, digitally connect them, and they will learn over time the traits of the dying “original” networks they are mimicking. Note we do this all the time in ANNs.
Another meta comment is I am like explaining how you could use a big steam engine made of brass to reach 60mph in a train. I don’t know of better techniques either. I am saying “well you could bolt the patients skull to a fixed point, expose the brain, and add additional structures to copy and augment it to restore lost capabilities.”
I don’t believe such a crude solution will be necessary, I just don’t know anything better with today’s tech base, and I am saying that this will work eventually. Your belief that “death always wins” would be like people in 1910 believing “aircraft will always crash”. Technically true but the rate matters, with methodical refinement and midair refueling and component replacement you can make an aircraft fly for centuries or longer before it crashes.