The SF idea that cloning = immortality is fucking retarded the original is still unconscious it's his copy that is...

The SF idea that cloning = immortality is fucking retarded the original is still unconscious it's his copy that is alive and experiences life on his own it's like saying having kids is the key to immortality.

SF writers are such dumb hacks.

In addition to your point we don't even know if clones could even retain the same memories as their host. As far as I know memories aren't exactly directly stored in your genetic sequence

Every time you go to sleep, your consciousness' existence ends. What makes clones different?

I don't think I've ever seen SF present that idea without highlighting the holes in that idea. Next you're going to tell me Asimov's three laws don't work.

It's not just 'we don't know' it's we do know, a clone will not retain any of your memories on principle.

That they aren't me? You stupid retard. Do you fucking think if one of the twin brothers die then the mind of the other is magically transfered to his brother just because they have similar bodies?

No, your brain is still on dummy. Even if you don't dream your brain is still functioning. The only time when your brain is not functioning is when you're dead.

If you wanted a less stupid analogy you should bring up how often our cells regenerate themselves making us 20 years down the line biologically different than us 20 years prior.

...

lack of materia permanence, obviously. They are another guy.

the point is, he was wrong with his second assumption of sleep as death, and it's ridiculous to equate self with just the concious part of your mental processes.

I've never seen this. I think the more common idea is that immortality through cloning is a result of perfect organ replacement.

I think you're listing a very obvious pitfall and even in this situation it's not literally the one person continuing on, but it does allow for the same person to continue indefinitely. Every time your greatest scientist bites it you just pop out a new one as a replacement!

>No, your brain is still on dummy
Nigga you have no proof of that, but then you have no proof you didn't pop into existence fully formed three nanoseconds ago.

The ship of theseus is the ship of theseus and you can go fuck yourself because it's irrelevant so long as it's perfect.

If your brain was off when you sleep then your bodily functions would cease you fucking idiot. You would die. You can't just turn off your entire body and expect it to magically turn on again.

America truly deserved 9/11

>Nigga you have no proof of that
Except there are shitloads of studies about how the brain operates while you are sleeping, you dumb fuck.

>Brain seizes to function upon sleep.
You know when you go to sleep your brain sorts through all the data it collected and puts them into long storage memories and short storage memories.

The brain still operates.

Your brain is still functional as an organ (provided an exterior universe to the consciousness actually exists) but your stream of consciousness, which defines who and what you are, ends. Understand what's being asserted.

Then what the fuck are dreams you dumbfuck.

They're literally delusions made from your consciousness, and you dream basically all the time while sleeping.

Your clone would be a separate human being with your DNA. Exactly like your identical twin brother or sister, except for the difference in age.

>stream of consciousness, which defines who and what you are, ends
When you wake up you go to sleep and then wake up your memory does not re set it self, so why would going to sleep end you consciousness? There is a big difference between unconsciousness (sleep) and the end of consciousness (death).

dumb poster

Just because you generally don't remember what happened when you were sleeping doesn't mean that your conciouness was interrupted. Serious, the "you die when you sleep" is a really fucking stupid school of though.

Copying human body is such a hassle
Why not just copy the mind and put it to some use?
Imagine if we copied tons of minds and then repurposed them to limited robots.

Are you aware of your dreams every moment from the instant you sleep until the moment you wake?
Again you fail to grasp what is being asserted. You are your stream of consciousness. You are not the lower function of your brain's passive homeostasis.
Whatever you don't remember functionally doesn't happen. You are nothing but what you remember.

That's basically the premise of Soma.

>Whatever you don't remember functionally doesn't happen. You are nothing but what you remember.
There is no interruption of your conciouness, thus it doesn't matter if you remember it or not.

So what?

It happens, and it's illegal in Ghost in the Shell. Because it fucks up the original mind if I remember correctly.

Why would it?
You just read the brain and write it down again into some other place
Reading a CD does not fuck up the CD either

>Why would it?
>You just read the brain

Oh, just reading the brain, I suppose that's real easy and obviously you obviously could not cause any damage while doing so.

MRIs exist...

we can already do brain scans im sure
not total but still

>Nigga you have no proof of that

YOU STUPID FUCK WE'VE SCANNED THE BRAIN WHILE PEOPLE SLEEP, IT HAS CLEAR PATTERNS OF ACTIVITY

A SLEEPING BRAIN DOES NOT EQUAL A DEAD BRAIN, FELLATING YUDKOWSKY DOES NOT MAKE YOU AN EXPERT ON ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE BRAIN

>MRIs exist...
>we can already do brain scans im sure

And you are under the belief that the data extracted for this process allows for the construction of an artificial human mind?

who knows
do you even need 90% of a human mind for it to work in limited ways?

No shit. However consciousness is a very particular pattern, which appears to be arrested by sleep, coma, etc.

If I smash your house down, and rebut your complaints with "THE CONSERVATION OF MASS DICTATES I HAVE DESTROYED NOTHING" I expect you to be cool with it, based on your attitude so far.

What tasks need 10% of a human mind, but can't be completed by software written in a more traditional way? Why add the ethical quagmire?

Who knows if AIs are more like 3% or 5%

>but your stream of consciousness, which defines who and what you are ends.
Again what you don't seem to understand is that the fact that I am the same person before and after I went to sleep means that the thing that makes me me did not "end" again unconsciousness=/=end of consciousness.

>he cant into lucid dreaming
git gud

Yet again you fail to grasp what is being asserted.
Let's phrase it better:
prove yesterday happened.

>prove yesterday happened.
By looking the availabre data, is possible to determinade that yesterday happened, unless you think that solipsism is the pinnacle of philosophy rather than a bunch of pseudo intectual masturbation.

...

OK, let's rephrase:
If you need a human mind to base an AI, that creates an ethical minefield. Is the minor gain in your labour force worth the hassle? why not employ a human? Why not create an AI with more traditional (or at least, less directly mind-copying) techniques?
Alternatively, you're just measuring the 'worth' of an AI in terms of fractions of human worth. Which makes you a terrible person, and adds nothing to the discussion.

>Again what you don't seem to understand is that the fact that I am the same person before and after I went to sleep means that the thing that makes me me did not "end" again unconsciousness=/=end of consciousness.
You're the same person before and after destructive teleportation. Discuss.

>He doesn't think the universe literally just spawned into existence

It's less about cloning = immortality, it's more about mind transfer = immortality. Ofcourse this brings up the issue of the mind copy+paste, instead of cut+aste.

Ultimately, this is a philosophically deep question, and I think you've clearly nailed it for mankind user. Finally we can put it to rest.

Well in case my own memory is not enough I also have multiple eye witnesses and google search history. You seem to confuse the ability to recall information with consciousness it self, lets say all of my past memories is a fabrication and I am but a brain in a jar, is my consciousness invalid for some reason?

Solipsism is, if nothing else, logically invulnerable.
That doesn't stop it from being stupid as all hell, but nevertheless, there's no arguments against it other than it being inelegant and devoid of further contemplation.

>Every time you go to sleep, your consciousness' existence ends.

What the fuck are dreams then?

> availabre
> determinade
> intectual

I'm not part of the debate party going on in this thread but what the hell happened here?

A product of the unconscious mind.

I am on the phone and english is not my first language. Sorry there, nigga.

What if you implant your mind into your clone?

Destructive uploading is a hackneyed plot device to shuffle the "multiple people" dilemma under the rug though.

If authors didn't put in some arbitrary rule that "you can only copy a mind by destroying it", you'd suddenly get a setting where digital copies of people start popping up everywhere.

Everyone knows the only immortality that works is slowly replacing your neurons with sturdier materials over about 20 years at the same rate your brain naturally recycles them.

Because, believe it or not, neurons are replaced every so often. No cell we own cold last as long as our lifespan without replacement.

>Destructive uploading is a hackneyed plot device

No more so than digital clones.

Quantum immortality. Your consciousness jumps to the nearest living version of you.

Not to mention in instances where ops version of cloning is mentioned the situation is either that "consciousness" is a measured and transferable thing or the immortality is in the view of the observer not the subject.

The worst is stuff like Altered Carbon where apparently they can move a brain around, back it up and restore it, clone it and save it to disk, but can't read or write it. it simply makes no decent sense

We already need human mind to base an AI
We just do it manually by trying to convert it through code and such
You make it sounds like our car making robots are slaves already or something

it's called science fiction for a reason lad

If I recall correctly, the pandora's star duology has something that skirts around both of those.
People can both rejuvenate (basically age reverting), and have their memories and shit all transplanted to a newgrown body in case you die bodily harm.

One form of punishment for criminals is suspended animation. However, one detective suddenly gets spooked, thinking she seems someone she already got locked up like that. Turns out that she is indeed locked up, but has several illegal clones that also have her memories and shit out for revenge.

and the rest of you
Sleeping is going on standby mode. Death is turning off.
There you go

>All these people arguing you die when you sleep because they do not remember and control their dreams

Weakminded plebs detected.

You dream several times a night and only remember the last. Dreams also barely account for 20% of your sleep time.

A friend of mine once told me that the most efficient and realistic form of teleportation would be to destroy the body and build an identical one on the other side. I was stunned by the sheer idiocy of the suggestion.

What's with all the dumbfucks who believe in souls in this thread?

Maybe -you- do.

>Are you aware of your dreams every moment from the instant you sleep until the moment you wake?
Yes, you just don't remember them afterwards.

I know, right?
Why not just... Building another. Without destroying.

The concept of a house has no mass.

Souls would actually make this much easier. Just transfer soul to clone.

Instead we have to fuck around with continuity of consciousness and thesius humans.

That's fucking facile and you know it. There's no equivalence between a copy of an existing human mind and something that human mind has made (or caused to be made).

Pretty much. From a purely genetic perspective, a clone is just a twin. I believe that a lot of controversy around real life cloning originates from the stupid SF belief that your clone is literally another you.

>Brainwashing a bunch of young girls
>Making a clone he intends to transfer his mind into a little girl too
Is Bison /ourguy/?

No you don't. Humans aren't special snowflakes. They don't have unique immaterial identities.

Well, if it is a well made clone, it would have a copy of your mind at least.
If it doesnt have that, then it is useless to me outside of organ farming with partial clones.

That is very frail moral judgement to hang on to.
Even if we make AI by hand, and it becomes sentient, we will copy it. We will multiply it. We are not going to ask for its consent.

The idea of a clone is an exact replica in aspects

>it would have a copy of your mind at least.
Unless you can somehow copy all of your memory and developed personality traits to that clone (and as far as we know that's impossible), he'd still be a twin. It's just a twin that can be "born" 20 years later. He'd still have your genetically inherited tendencies, but by the end of the day he'll end up forming his own memories, experiences, traumas etc. Just like a twin brother.

I'm pretty sure we'd get rid of 99% of all controversies if we got rid of the word "clone" and instead used the word "artificial twin".

>Implying only humans have souls.

Come to Eclipse Phase General, asking about the perils of making forks of yourself and selling them into indentured slavery as prostitutes to fuel the Alpha addiction you developed as a way of getting around social anxiety.

>Unless you can somehow copy all of your memory and developed personality traits to that clone (and as far as we know that's impossible)..

Did they find out where memory is actually stored? Presumably if you made an exact facsimile of an individual and made its brain active it would inherit their memories and personality. Of course this would require a lot more than genetic coding and probably take exact manipulation of chemical quantities and electrons, but still.

user, souls dont come into it.
Differentiating between the original and a copy is super important even without souls.
Hell, it is important even in inanimate objects. Just because you have another hammer doesnt mean it is the same hammer.

user, if you are just msking a twin, that is a shitty clone, like what we make today.
And that shit is useless.
Well talk about uses when you can copy minds.

Theoretically that's possible. Then you'd end up with a clone who -unless specifically informed that he's the clone- thinks he's the real deal (a popular sci-fi plotpoint). Still, the very birth of that clone would already be a point of divergence, as from that point onwards the clone and the original will experience different things (or the same thing from different perspectives). He still wouldn't be "you", nor would he be a perfect copy of you past the point of divergence.

That is why you tell the clone he is a clone, and then let him join you as an equal.
Then you do this eighty billion times until you rule the stars.

What if you make a clone, but somehow manipulate the chromosomes that dictate gender and make him a female version of you? Impregnating her would mean a 50% of getting another carbon copy of yourself (and 50% of getting an "inbred" abomination).

Why choose between cloning and reproduction when you can do both with the same results?

Some of those eight billion will be ladies, sure. In fact, many of them will most likely have tweaks to reduce health problems.
The important part is they all start with the same mind.

If you worked differently, you'd die quickly, user.

You're saying it is important while giving zero reasoning for it.

Go to bed Horatio, you won't rule the stars while Vaulters still exist.

The reasoning is mostly everyday or logistical or social.
It doesnt matter if you and frank have hammers that are identical down to the electron, one is yours and one is his.

Similarly, it doesnt matter if you and your clone are identical in every way, one has a history and record, The other is new. They each have their own survival instincts and perceptions, and they occupy different spots in space.

You cant stop me, vaulters! You also cant stop me, me, me, or me!

So if there's only one, it doesn't matter.

It matters quite a lot to whichever one you want to destroy.
It matters enough to be the plot of an action movie centered on duplicate rights that ends with a toppled regime.
It also matters because of the profound implications of making and destroying people.

This is either bait, or you're legitimately not intelligent enough to talk to people.

1) Almost every setting that uses clones as a form of immortality has some form of memory backup or transfer as a separate technology from cloning.
2) Almost every one of those settings also have a subtext of "Is your perfect copy still you?" It's like the entire point of transhuman Sci-fi. "What makes you you?" "What makes you human?" If you don't get that then maybe some of the more complex forms of Sci-fi aren't for you.

>it matters because of these vague reasons I won't mention because I don't want to be outed as believing in souls like the initial post said

Why are the 14 year olds who can't grasp abstract concepts even posting in here?

Those arent really vague.
In fact, they seem quite specific and like the kind of thing that has historically gotten fields of research shut down for decades. Or caused widespread rebellion, in instances where human life was devalued far enough.

Face it user, at some point your research is going to hit an ethics committee.

Those all seem like pretty specific and very practical reasons, user. I know that I don't want a clone uprising in my hands. I also don't want to get smashed by a teleporter for a copy to take my place. Both of these things would cause me numerous problems.