demagogue on 5/12/2020 at 11:55
Don't ask me; ask Tocky. He's the one going off on "non-transferable". Obviously original Tocky would be going off on the same thing & resenting the very existence of the clone Tocky we have on the forums here.
More specifically, though, I imagine it plays out more or less the way the movie Moon plays out.
Briareos H on 5/12/2020 at 20:39
Quote Posted by Tocky
I maintain we are still this perspective and it is non transferable
I haven't read the previously mentioned conversation, maybe it would provide more context but I can't think of a single point of scientific knowledge that would exclude reproducibility of the processes that generate our individuality, so for all intents and purposes yours is a statement that is equivalent to a religious belief.
Anyway, I liked DEVS, as much for the breath of fresh air in sci-fi as for the take on the elite of big tech asshole thinkers. More like this please.
Harvester on 5/12/2020 at 20:55
You know, I keep trying with these military/special forces movies like 6 Underground, 12 Strong, Extraction etc. I have to face that this genre is just not that interesting to me. Netflix's Mosul gets decent reviews but I turned it off halfway through, I failed to engage with it. Even the lauded The Hurt Locker didn't do much for me. I do like some movies that are more about the politics of war like Eye in the Sky and Green Zone though.
rachel on 5/12/2020 at 21:15
6 Underground is a mess. It's not a genre issue, it's a quality issue, and I'd say that for most of these flicks.
Harvester on 5/12/2020 at 21:30
Maybe, I do like the classic war movies like Saving Private Ryan, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket and I was also engaged with Black Hawk Down, but those are all from world class directors.
It's like when there is a lot of action but too little reason story-wise to care about it, I quickly lose interest. I don't even like the highly popular John Wick movies that much, I mean they're okay but I don't like them as much as most guys do. Same with the Taken trilogy. The Bourne movies are fine, I like those a little more.
froghawk on 5/12/2020 at 22:18
Quote Posted by Harvester
You know, I keep trying with these military/special forces movies like 6 Underground, 12 Strong, Extraction etc. I have to face that this genre is just not that interesting to me. Netflix's Mosul gets decent reviews but I turned it off halfway through, I failed to engage with it. Even the lauded The Hurt Locker didn't do much for me. I do like some movies that are more about the politics of war like Eye in the Sky and Green Zone though.
There's nothing strange about not enjoying garbage propaganda. Whereas some of the films you listed on your last post have something real to say.
Tocky on 5/12/2020 at 22:21
Quote Posted by demagogue
You're not already a machine replication?
What if the "real you" came along wanting himself back from you?
Why do people keep missing the key element of my argument? NON TRANSFERABLE. My singular perspective is non transferable. You can make one just like me but it isn't me. You cannot transfer my perspective. If one came along wanting himself back from me he would be insane even if he were just like me. Particularly if he were just like me. He would already have my memory. But lets say he didn't and somehow his were wiped. He now wants mine because I was made to keep them for him. He would not be taking his memories back. He would be taking mine because I am a singular perspective. He would be damaging my perspective though I am still not him. We can have exactly the same traits and memories and still not be the same perspective. When I die then I die completely. When he dies then he dies completely. We are not the same perspective even if we are the exact same to all other measurements.
This is the only me to me. It does not matter to me if the other is me to the rest of the world. And no, I'm biological, and don't want to compare the similarities of machine and bio. It's not really productive to the argument to do so.
Tocky on 5/12/2020 at 22:40
Quote Posted by Briareos H
I haven't read the previously mentioned conversation, maybe it would provide more context but I can't think of a single point of scientific knowledge that would exclude reproducibility of the processes that generate our individuality, so for all intents and purposes yours is a statement that is equivalent to a religious belief.
Anyway, I liked DEVS, as much for the breath of fresh air in sci-fi as for the take on the elite of big tech asshole thinkers. More like this please.
I have no idea of the threads name. It was interesting though. As I explained above, I did not exclude reproduction of me, I excluded my transferability. When someone is made just like you they yet have their own perspective, their own view of the world. They may react and speak in stereo, think in stereo but not be your perspective. When you die they don't. When they die you don't. No religious belief occurs in that. Singular perspective is what makes the two of you individuals and nothing else. Otherwise you are the same
to the outside world. Not to yourselves though. To both of you you are very damn precious individually no matter how non unique you are.
I liked DEVS very much too. I love thinking science fiction. This one did to the very last. Then it failed. Non transferable. That's okay as long as you understand
that they did not die and continue on in the sim. The sim continued. They died. The sim was them in every respect but perspective. The sim believes it is them because to them in the sim it is. To the bodies that died it is not. That perspective died with those bodies. Do you understand?
Pyrian on 5/12/2020 at 23:04
Hypothesis: Your "perspective" doesn't just die when your body dies. It also dies every night when you go to sleep. (And quite possibly a lot more often than that.) You get a new one when you wake up. Same memories, same personality. New "perspective".
1) Can you disprove that hypothesis?
2) If not, is that really any different from a perfect copy when you die?
3) If not, what about a perfect copy when you didn't die?
Tocky on 6/12/2020 at 00:34
And we did this same argument in the other thread as well. I even mentioned that in my original post on this page. I can't disprove that hypothesis because I am only/ have only the me of right now to compare. I also have the memories of the me who wrote that sentence just now. I also have the memories of the one who wrote that one ad infinitum. You never step into the same river twice. That was in the movie. The perfect copy when I die is the perfect copy once I have died. A perfect copy when I don't die is also just a perfect copy. I'm not getting information from his eyes or from his ears or tactile. We are singular perspectives. I am this perspective right now. Remake me and I am still this perspective and not the other. I am this singular perspective.
There is a story by Algis Budrys called Rogue Moon. He understood in 1960 what I am saying. In it he had the inventor of the first transporter. The inventor knew. Algis understands exactly what I do.