There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Telorand ,

Beware the T0.001

can ,

This article is 9 years old. Here’s the OpenWorm Wikipedia page.

Edit: still haven’t mapped the brain but here’s the official site and [the github] (github.com/openworm/OpenWorm)

octopus_ink ,

Well that sent me down an interesting but short rabbithole wormhole, ending here. Glad to see I’m not alone in thinking most forms of consciousness copy or transfer that get discussed are actually involving murder/death of the original, even if the resulting copy believes itself to be the same entity and people around it treat it as such.

I’d absolutely be one of those “I ain’t getting in that transporter” people on Star Trek unless convinced that it truly was a transfer of consciousness, not a copy and destroy.

Mind you, I’d love for that not to be the case, and would love to be convinced otherwise. It kills my enjoyment of stories that are centered around that sort of technology sometimes.

Mind uploading may potentially be accomplished by either of two methods: copy-and-upload or copy-and-delete by gradual replacement of neurons (which can be considered as a gradual destructive uploading), until the original organic brain no longer exists and a computer program emulating the brain takes control of the body.

Oddly, the bolded ship-of-Theseus kind of approach doesn’t bother me as much - maybe because it feels akin to the continuous death and replacement of individual cells, but if challenged I might have a hard time defending why this bothers me so much less than the Transporter or even Altered Carbon approach.

can ,

I was led into the Connectome page which I found quite interesting

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/DTI-sagittal-fibers.jpg

Tractographic reconstruction of neural connections via DTI

octopus_ink ,

Oh yeah that’s fascinating for sure!

The significance of the connectome stems from the realization that the structure and function of the human brain are intricately linked, through multiple levels and modes of brain connectivity. There are strong natural constraints on which neurons or neural populations can interact, or how strong or direct their interactions are. Indeed, the foundation of human cognition lies in the pattern of dynamic interactions shaped by the connectome.

Warl0k3 ,

You’re coming at this from a slightly askew angle. Consciousness is holographic - that is, it’s complex behavior arising in the interaction of a more complex system. There’s nothing “more” to it than what we see. The transporters from startrek, which destroy then reproduce exactly, would change nothing about your experience. You’re just a complex arrangement of atoms, and it doesnt matter where that arrangement occurs so long as it’s unique. There is no “you”, there’s just “stuff” stuck together in a way that lets it think that it can think about itself. A perfect reproduction would result in the same entity, perfectly reproduced.

octopus_ink ,

A perfect reproduction would result in the same entity, perfectly reproduced.

It would, but I remain convinced that the continuity of my experience would end, same as if I died, and the entity who came out the other side would believe itself to be me, and believe itself to be unscathed, but actually exist only until the next time it got into a transporter, when the cycle would happen again.

originalucifer OP ,
@originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

continuity of my experience would end

why? what property is altered that would 'end continuity'? kinda just sounds like a personal delineation.. a personal preference. like being annoyed at being 'interrupted'.

octopus_ink ,

I don’t think I can defend my position very cogently or I’d argue against other interpretations more vigorously - and as I’ve said I’d love to be wrong. It’s certainly at or beyond the depth of my understanding of consciousness, but that doesn’t mean I accept that yours is necessarily more valid. (no snark intended with that comment)

When I bring it up I get challenged to articulate why I feel that way and inevitably get presented with a question like yours that I can’t answer - but generally no one gives me a “here’s why you are wrong” argument, they just give me “you can’t differentiate between what you’ve posited and a nondestructive consciousness transfer and therefore you are wrong.” I maintain that my lack of ability to articulate that difference reflects poorly on me, but doesn’t actually prove I’m wrong.

For example, I don’t think my inability to articulate a ‘property that is altered’ represents a weakness in my position, and I’m not sure a property needs to be altered for my understanding to be true.

Using (very poorly and atypically) the ship of Theseus example, I think we’d agree that if I had two absolutely identical sets of shipbuilding materials, down to the atomic level, or further, down to the state of all observable properties of that matter and the particles that make it up, (I have no idea how one would achieve such a thing), and built a ship from one set of those materials, then vaporized that ship and built another that was 100% identical using the second set of those materials, those ships would be two identical but distnict entities. I don’t think I’ve seen an argument that convinces me that the same wouldn’t be true for pulling my consciousness (ephemeral and subjective as it may be) and body through a transporter or other such destructive process.

Your argument feels like you are telling me that if I use a replicator to make two different but identical cups of earl grey hot they are actually the same cup of tea, when plainly they are not. Considering (sticking with star trek) the stories of duplicates due to being stuck in the “pattern buffer” or similar handwavium, it seems clear that the ST transporter is capable of creating multiple entities. The only difference between a normal transporter experience and one of those freaky transporter accidents seems to be whether the two entities are both alive at the same time.

COULD there be (since we’re in the realm of scifi anyway) some method of transferring consciousness that wouldn’t seem like death to me? Yes I’m sure there could. But I don’t think I’ve seen one in any popular scifi, at least not that I can think of right now.

Sanctus ,
@Sanctus@lemmy.world avatar

We see someone’s POV going through a transporter, you just see where you are, sparkles, and now you’re somewhere else. The unease probably comes from the uncertainty. The mere fact we can’t ascertain what really happens in a transporter to your consciousness is very suspect in a universe like Star Trek where we find science babble for everything.

Though, think of it for a moment. Your atoms are being torn apart and the structure is being rebuilt somewhere else. That totally just sounds like you die. I wouldn’t want to go in there either.

octopus_ink ,

Your atoms are being torn apart and the structure is being rebuilt somewhere else. That totally just sounds like you die. I wouldn’t want to go in there either.

Exactly.

Again though, if the technology were actually real, I would expect that there would be a laymen-friendly version of why it wasn’t actually death that I’d be able to accept. I just haven’t seen one in all the times I’ve had this discussion.

originalucifer OP ,
@originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

youre not wrong in that cloning you twice would immediately create 2 distinct entities. and their consciousness/brains would immediately differentiate. so? now theres 2 of you.

i dont see the problem with there being 2 versions of you instead of the 1 that was destroyed and recreated in a transporter. its the experience that makes the differentiation, and if there is only 1 of you at a time there is no differentiation. only one of you continues experience, there you are.

octopus_ink ,

and if there is only 1 of you at a time there is no differentiation. only one of you continues experience, there you are.

In my interpretation it’s a different one of me, and that matters. Granted, I don’t expect either of us are on a path that is likely to convince the other, but fundamentally that’s my objection. (see my two different ships example)

nondescripthandle ,

Oh neat, we can give Legos depression.

SpaceNoodle ,

Can worms be depressed?

NegativeInf ,

Yes.

AmidFuror ,

To subterranean levels.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

That’s all very well and good and all, until it meets another worm and wants to talk. Perhaps one of the opposite gender…

flerp ,

RFK sweating bullets

Tylerdurdon ,

He should feel like a proud papa. Hell, they should call it RFK jr.

kitnaht ,

I bet this one could run for President.

cabron_offsets ,

Is this like an RFK joke or some shit?

Caboose12000 ,

who the hell is RFK?

can ,

I appreciate you not knowing. He’s a Kennedy that was (?) running to be president. He had a brain worm.

Caboose12000 ,

he had a brain worm? like literally? not just like a hyperbolic way of calling him weird?

can ,

yeah

HeckGazer ,

Why is this post not marked NSFW(not safe for worms)?

NocturnalMorning ,

Because it’s artificial, not the real stuff! Duh

Kolanaki ,
@Kolanaki@yiffit.net avatar

Neat. We’ve seen a man with a brain half eaten by a worm, and now we get to see brains made of worms.

Warl0k3 ,

Extremely old news, but still very cool.

We used to have one of these roaming around my college compaci lab, hooked up to a big red bluetooth button that would recompile the neurological structure when pressed. When we were feeling particularly nasty (or they were waxing particularly poetic), we used to challenge the humanities majors to push the button and ‘kill’ the worm.

I’m not particularly proud of the fact I made quite a few people break down completely with the implications of asking them to do that - or more sadistically, by repeatedly pressing the button and asking them why it mattered. I got punched in the face by a vegan for that one, which was fair enough tbh. Anyways, the reality of the project really isnt something most people are prepared to address.

can ,

I think it’s good that you made some people come to solid conclusions regarding their views on the matter, but I’m sure it didn’t win you many friends.

Shanedino ,

Hmm seems odd to me. I personally would not have even thought anyone would have second guessed pressing the button.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •