To paraphrase this week's "Bionic Woman," twenty years is forever in technology; twenty years is like the rise and fall of Rome. Look at where we were twenty years Ago. Brilliant advances, since then.
And I would have to agree with the sentiment, but I would, of course, go the Deus Ex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_Ex) route.
Y'know, I never finished Deus Ex. I recently started playing it for [I think] the 3rd time. Only this time with cheats, because the last time I got all the fucking way to Paris... >_<
Although, I'm mainly saying as far as someone's actual self being uploadable, I'm really not seeing it happen quite so soon as 20 years. It could be 40, it could be 87, it could even be 20 years, 7 months, 2 weeks, a day and a half.
Maybe a backup copy of the self, but not the self self. I understand the Law of Accelerating Returns, but what about the Law of Stagnating General Human Consensus - or the "'We Fear Change' Factor," if you will?
What if the technology to allow for it is right around the corner, then some folks back home decide they want a law passed, so they call their local Congressman, and he says, "You're right! There oughta be a law!" So he drafts up an idea and introduces it to Congress, where it becomes a bill - but, only a bill; which then proceeds to sit on Capitol Hill, get stuck in Committee, where it has to sit and wait to receive enough positive votes, in order to be signed by the President - and, subsequently, becomes a law preventing the process of digitally copying the consciousness of another human being?
Or does that already count as cloning...? o.O
Anyway, the matter of human nature isn't necessarily being factored into the equation as well as it should be. Although, it really can't - being the übervariable that it is, and having no officially defined notation (find ƒ(Ξ), solve for All. Moral. Foundation.)- but I'm mainly just pointing out a possible outcome). People can change, especially in 20 years. But that doesn't mean that enough of them will make enough of a change - themselves, to themselves - for it to be considered acceptable by those with the most power, at that particular time.
but what about the Law of Stagnating General Human Consensus - or the "'We Fear Change' Factor," if you will?
You make a VERY good point, there, and that's exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to change, personally.
I think that cloning counts, there, but only in the broad sense.
Also, I'm currently working on the theory that some input variables aren't at all Quantifiable, but are only Qualifiable.
I bring this to everyone's attention, every time I find it, precisely because I'm trying to mold and direct the change of mind in a specific direction. I do, in fact, have a vested interest, and I'm willing to insert myself in the power structure to make it happen.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-10-21 11:02 pm (UTC)Though, personally, if I were ever to have my consciousness uploaded to anything, I'd totally pull a Boz and go all Radical Nomad iMessiah. >:D
no subject
Date: 2007-10-21 11:29 pm (UTC)And I would have to agree with the sentiment, but I would, of course, go the Deus Ex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_Ex) route.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-22 01:26 am (UTC)Although, I'm mainly saying as far as someone's actual self being uploadable, I'm really not seeing it happen quite so soon as 20 years. It could be 40, it could be 87, it could even be 20 years, 7 months, 2 weeks, a day and a half.
Maybe a backup copy of the self, but not the self self. I understand the Law of Accelerating Returns, but what about the Law of Stagnating General Human Consensus - or the "'We Fear Change' Factor," if you will?
What if the technology to allow for it is right around the corner, then some folks back home decide they want a law passed, so they call their local Congressman, and he says, "You're right! There oughta be a law!" So he drafts up an idea and introduces it to Congress, where it becomes a bill - but, only a bill; which then proceeds to sit on Capitol Hill, get stuck in Committee, where it has to sit and wait to receive enough positive votes, in order to be signed by the President - and, subsequently, becomes a law preventing the process of digitally copying the consciousness of another human being?
Or does that already count as cloning...? o.O
Anyway, the matter of human nature isn't necessarily being factored into the equation as well as it should be. Although, it really can't - being the übervariable that it is, and having no officially defined notation (find ƒ(Ξ), solve for All. Moral. Foundation.)- but I'm mainly just pointing out a possible outcome). People can change, especially in 20 years. But that doesn't mean that enough of them will make enough of a change - themselves, to themselves - for it to be considered acceptable by those with the most power, at that particular time.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-22 02:19 am (UTC)You make a VERY good point, there, and that's exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to change, personally.
I think that cloning counts, there, but only in the broad sense.
Also, I'm currently working on the theory that some input variables aren't at all Quantifiable, but are only Qualifiable.
I bring this to everyone's attention, every time I find it, precisely because I'm trying to mold and direct the change of mind in a specific direction. I do, in fact, have a vested interest, and I'm willing to insert myself in the power structure to make it happen.