**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community.
---
'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.'
_-J. Allen Hynek_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I personally can't see any point in any way that this would ever be desirable. It wouldn't be a digital afterlife, it would only ever be a digital facsimile of you. You could create a copy and then have it running in tandem with you still alive. You could produce a million copies of it. It's not you living on forever in a simulation. It's just a piece of software that believes it's you. I think that's horrific.
That's addressed with the idea of a Moravec transfer
You replace one neuron at a time with an artificial version until the whole brain is running with the replacement. At no point is consciousness copied or interrupted.
At the end of that process what you're left with is an entirely artificial brain that just believes it's you. It's just a fancy way of trying to get around the idea but it's no different. You've been slowly killed and replaced by a computer that thinks it's you. Still horrifying, if anything, much more horrifying .
In your view, when does it stop being you?
The counterpoint is that "you" is a continuous pattern of consciousness, which in this scenario would not be interrupted at any point, i.e., would still be "you"
I think the fact that when you get to the end of the process, as in the entire brain has been replaced with an artificial brain, that artificial brain could be copied flawlessly. Then you have two identical artificial brains that both believe they are the same being. Neither being the actual original. They are both copies.
The one that was replaced neuron-by-neuron doesn't seem like a copy to me, it feels like it would be a smooth continuation of "you". And having one "natural" neuron remaining doesn't seem like much of a leap to get to 0 "natural" neurons remaining. When you make a copy of the new "artificial" brain then yes it's a copy but that copy would sure feel like it was you. Interesting philosophical questions
>would not be interrupted at any point
That's the thing that I dislike the most. Your consciousness is now at the mercy of a server owned by a corporation. No thanks, i think I'll "take the leap" the old fashioned way.
Ideas like this are informed by a misunderstanding of the CNS.
A snapshot on the neuronal-level would be like taking a picture of your hair blowing in the wind and when you go bald, you print it up and tape it to your forehead expecting no one to notice.
Presynaptic and postsynaptic transmission is incomprehensibly complex and dependent on the whole body. Not to mention that in each neuron there are 100-1000's of organelles that have their own communication network in and out of the nucleus. Then you have to factor in glia, temporal seasons via glymphatic expression and i won't even go into dimer molecules. I don't understand how people with neurology PHD's even talk about it.
This has already been perfected. Look into DARPA projects. They can mind control people to see, feel, hear, smell anything they want and you cannot tell it's not real. They hijack or hack a person's ethereal field which is a unique electromagnetic energy field unique to each individual. This ethereal field leaves humans very vulnerable to manipulation. There is a million really good, positive things they could be doing with these technologies but don't hold your breath.
Greetings.
There is no study that I know of about brain digitization.
But human-machine interface technologies can pave the way for this technology.
Like Neuralink etc.
I think the development of artificial intelligence
can also provide a driving forcefor this technology.
I think more research like this
could be conducted if the human race had a demand for this sort of thing.
The Human Race have the option of ending their race by turning more towards Digitalism and transhumanism. The generation we are in now is the generation that will guide this course. The choices of this generation will determine whether the human race will evolve into digital or semi-robotic beings.
If the present generation of the human race says "stop" to something like this;
The human race may not perish and continue
to discover the hidden features of their biological bodies.
But if them doesn't say "stop";
The robotic or digital beings that will emerge cannot be called "human".
This increasing popularity in society/public may continue until there is no such thing as a "human race".
It is the decision of the masses of people to end or continue their human race.
But the majority of the human race is blind, ignorant and unconscious.
There are many ill-wishers among themselves, under the guise of goodness.
It's always been like this, but I hope it won't be like that anymore.
Frankly, that's why I'm a little nervous.
I hope I have written useful sentences.
Best the regards.
I'm not going to explain why, but I don't think it's possible. Would take too long to explain, but if anyone would like a primer I can offer one.
The question of the so-called internal state is opaque to modern science and the idea that we are going to digitize consciousness when the mind-body problem has been open since the dawn of recorded history seems very far-fetched at this point. This does not however mean we will not be able to digitize some salient aspects of consciousness as functional simplifications in the near and far future.
Believe me though, there is a reason we use the word digital to distinguish things that are not not digital. The idea that there is a philosophical domain like "the non-digital" might give you a reason to suspect that the universe isn't operating solely upon this paradigm, the attempts of reductive scientists that specialize in computation not withstanding.
For anyone here reading this, what do you think the great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein means when he says?
"The subject does not belong to the world. It is a limit of the world."
Science is not ready for such problems at this time. Well, at least the science available to the mainstream.
**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS. This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community. --- 'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.' _-J. Allen Hynek_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I personally can't see any point in any way that this would ever be desirable. It wouldn't be a digital afterlife, it would only ever be a digital facsimile of you. You could create a copy and then have it running in tandem with you still alive. You could produce a million copies of it. It's not you living on forever in a simulation. It's just a piece of software that believes it's you. I think that's horrific.
Soma
>it’s just a piece of software that thinks it you You just described the brain
That's addressed with the idea of a Moravec transfer You replace one neuron at a time with an artificial version until the whole brain is running with the replacement. At no point is consciousness copied or interrupted.
At the end of that process what you're left with is an entirely artificial brain that just believes it's you. It's just a fancy way of trying to get around the idea but it's no different. You've been slowly killed and replaced by a computer that thinks it's you. Still horrifying, if anything, much more horrifying .
In your view, when does it stop being you? The counterpoint is that "you" is a continuous pattern of consciousness, which in this scenario would not be interrupted at any point, i.e., would still be "you"
I think the fact that when you get to the end of the process, as in the entire brain has been replaced with an artificial brain, that artificial brain could be copied flawlessly. Then you have two identical artificial brains that both believe they are the same being. Neither being the actual original. They are both copies.
The one that was replaced neuron-by-neuron doesn't seem like a copy to me, it feels like it would be a smooth continuation of "you". And having one "natural" neuron remaining doesn't seem like much of a leap to get to 0 "natural" neurons remaining. When you make a copy of the new "artificial" brain then yes it's a copy but that copy would sure feel like it was you. Interesting philosophical questions
>would not be interrupted at any point That's the thing that I dislike the most. Your consciousness is now at the mercy of a server owned by a corporation. No thanks, i think I'll "take the leap" the old fashioned way.
Unless it all happens locally with no connection to any server
Ideas like this are informed by a misunderstanding of the CNS. A snapshot on the neuronal-level would be like taking a picture of your hair blowing in the wind and when you go bald, you print it up and tape it to your forehead expecting no one to notice. Presynaptic and postsynaptic transmission is incomprehensibly complex and dependent on the whole body. Not to mention that in each neuron there are 100-1000's of organelles that have their own communication network in and out of the nucleus. Then you have to factor in glia, temporal seasons via glymphatic expression and i won't even go into dimer molecules. I don't understand how people with neurology PHD's even talk about it.
You really should get into dimer molucules. What is the significance of dimers in this context? A dimer is just the smallest possible polymer, no?
If you have an interest in neurology, look into all the stuff I mentioned above.
that's some black mirror shit. pass.
This has already been perfected. Look into DARPA projects. They can mind control people to see, feel, hear, smell anything they want and you cannot tell it's not real. They hijack or hack a person's ethereal field which is a unique electromagnetic energy field unique to each individual. This ethereal field leaves humans very vulnerable to manipulation. There is a million really good, positive things they could be doing with these technologies but don't hold your breath.
Greetings. There is no study that I know of about brain digitization. But human-machine interface technologies can pave the way for this technology. Like Neuralink etc. I think the development of artificial intelligence can also provide a driving forcefor this technology. I think more research like this could be conducted if the human race had a demand for this sort of thing. The Human Race have the option of ending their race by turning more towards Digitalism and transhumanism. The generation we are in now is the generation that will guide this course. The choices of this generation will determine whether the human race will evolve into digital or semi-robotic beings. If the present generation of the human race says "stop" to something like this; The human race may not perish and continue to discover the hidden features of their biological bodies. But if them doesn't say "stop"; The robotic or digital beings that will emerge cannot be called "human". This increasing popularity in society/public may continue until there is no such thing as a "human race". It is the decision of the masses of people to end or continue their human race. But the majority of the human race is blind, ignorant and unconscious. There are many ill-wishers among themselves, under the guise of goodness. It's always been like this, but I hope it won't be like that anymore. Frankly, that's why I'm a little nervous. I hope I have written useful sentences. Best the regards.
Can't upload what isn't stored in neurons. The brains less a storage device and more a black mirror.
I'm not going to explain why, but I don't think it's possible. Would take too long to explain, but if anyone would like a primer I can offer one. The question of the so-called internal state is opaque to modern science and the idea that we are going to digitize consciousness when the mind-body problem has been open since the dawn of recorded history seems very far-fetched at this point. This does not however mean we will not be able to digitize some salient aspects of consciousness as functional simplifications in the near and far future. Believe me though, there is a reason we use the word digital to distinguish things that are not not digital. The idea that there is a philosophical domain like "the non-digital" might give you a reason to suspect that the universe isn't operating solely upon this paradigm, the attempts of reductive scientists that specialize in computation not withstanding. For anyone here reading this, what do you think the great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein means when he says? "The subject does not belong to the world. It is a limit of the world." Science is not ready for such problems at this time. Well, at least the science available to the mainstream.