Upload mind

I wouldn't do this peersonally, but I also think you're missing the bigger point that "you" were never a real continuity having thing in the first place even as a product of brain activity. The idea that activity from moment to moment in a brain has some sort of connected identity to it is a story of convenience, not an actual property you could either carry over or not carry over to a digital context.

Brain is what the brain does. It's not like hardware and software, where you can just scan out the data.

It's both at the same time and more. The hardware is configured to execute certain function (program), it stores certain electrical and chemical state that is both data, program and input.

Uploading it would require scanning and storing this whole state and i bet you'd run into quantum bullshit where one can reliably measure only this or that parameter without compromising the mind/brain.

IMHO the best shot would be merging brain with some computer augmentation where the functions are gradually transferred to the computer.

You cannot carry "you" into a digital form for the same reason you cannot carry a magnetic field into a digital form. You can _describe_ it, and then maybe create a new physical copy based on that description. There is "you" and it is somehow related to the physical object "brain", but we have no fucking idea how exactly at this moment. Just think about how fragile consciousness is. You loose blood supply to the brain for a second and it's all blacknes now, you cease to feel. Yet, your brain is still more or less active and all the neural links are the same. Good luck initiating that narrow state of awakeness in a usb stick.

Out of all the people I hate, I hate the ai singularity fags the most. They spread bullshit and get a bunch of people to believe in bullshit because they're afraid of dying.

I'm a hard physicalist.
You're a digital dualist.

You believe there is "digital soul".
I believe brain is physical. Which means:

1. Local
2. Non-discrete (analog)
3. Non-deterministic (quantum)

None of these properties are applicable to digital data and algorthms.
Data is not real. It only becomes meaningful when interpreted.

You "transfer" yourself into a digital computer - you loose all three.
You consciousness is no more, bye-bye. Blackness.

>not all the irrelevant biological things it also does like regulating sleep or controlling muscles).
Those "irrelevant things" are part of your mind, and who you are.

This.

...

Cognition isn't a magnetic field. This is why the Turing Test is a thing, to keep people like you from going "but it isn't really consciousness!" There is nothing about the task of convincing people behavioral outputs are the product of a conscious mind that exists beyond what a program could do. Therefore the mind is capable of existing as a program ran on an artificial machine.
Everyone is a digital dualist if you use a definition of dualism so loose that it considers recognizing the existence of computer programs as a form of dualism. The fact programs are a distinct non-physical abstraction you can reference as an alternative to working with physical machinery directly isn't really the same thing as believing in dualism.

>digitalize the brain
>create a simulacrum that fools some cutoff proportion of observers
pick one

Keep on thinking about it, "it'd just be a copy" is the pleb halfway there stance, the real epiphany is realizing there wasn't any real module of continuity to carry over from the brain in the first place.
existentialcomics.com/comic/1

Define the specific difference missing between a "fake" conscious entity that convinces everyone it's conscious vs. a real conscious entity.

well in this instance it's very clear. it is much easier to convincingly imitate someone than to copy their exact mental state. the outside observer is irrelevant; simply put the twin brains in identical environments and see if they act identically

Oh Jesus.
What's with the Veeky Forums "holier than thou" crowd that insist there's no such thing as:
>time
>gravity
>a human mind

This.

But i didnt read the comic.

>existentialcomics.com/comic/1
OP here

I've read that comic some time ago

The thing is that there's an illusion of continuity, and we as mammal humans are fond of it

If you reach the state where you deeply believe theres no continuity, dying is the same as going to sleep, or even is the same as being awake from one second to another

We have an emotion that "tells us" that dying is not so cool, of course you can dissociate from that emotion (as well as any other emotion), but you can also buy the illusion

There are people have somniphobia, and it's a reasonable fear if you think about it

>put the twin brains in identical environments and see if they act identically
OK, then you're acknowledging a mind is a program since you'd recognize a program producing identical outputs to a biologically based mind as successfully reproducing it.

no, I'm acknowledging that such a program would fulfill your proposed definition of duplication, and explaining that passing the Turing test would not. It remains to be shown (and is probably impossible to show) that such a digital brain would experience consciousness in the way that we do.

You get to choose:
A) Continuity of identity doesn't exist in the first place or
B) Brain uploading is possible and isn't "just a copy."
What you don't get to say is that it works in the brain but magically stops working in any otger substrate.

OK, then you don't have an actual concept of what is missing and should stop bringing the idea of something missing up until you can define what that missing thing is.

no, I have a very concrete concept of what it is missing. I put it to you that I am not confident that if I followed your procedure and put my brain in a computer, I would feel the same as I do now. I am not confident that I would have any sense of identity at all.
I think you're being disingenuous: Are you really so confident that nothing is missing that you would be willing to subject yourself to such a procedure, obliterate your physical brain in favor of such a digital one, if it fulfilled your criteria?

You don't have a "concrete concept" of this alleged missing thing You haven't even begun trying to define it.
>Are you really so confident that nothing is missing that you would be willing to subject yourself to such a procedure
I don't believe continuity of identity actually exists in any setting, brain based or otherwise. That's basic ego death 101 shit, eat some shrooms nigger, after the fact narrative devices are there to make it easier to reference people based causes for events and to help build up complex behaviors and social practices, you shouldn't mistake that as a literal soul that magically ties everything your brain does into one being and which conveniently can't be carried over to any artificial environment.

if you really believe in ego death why is winning an internet argument so important to you?

What do you mean "believe in ego death?" Does anyone not believe ego death is a real thing?
Also same reason everyone else behaves irrationally. Recognizing something on an intellectual level doesn't necessarily change your behavior at all times from that point on unless you believe behavior is somehow the product of deliberate rationality.

>Does anyone not believe ego death is a real thing?
I don't. Prove it to me.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4906025/
Also do some psychedelics already regardless of this thread / discussion, that's like going through life never knowing what sex is like, except even worse because sex is just pleasure and this is getting to experience a new channel on your TV set analogy mind after a lifetime of leaving it on the TV guide channel.

The world cant tolerate a fully sentient human population. Overpopulation stresses are already pruning large amounts of human consciousness and replacing natural behaviours with coping mechanisms. I dont know maybe in a few dozen generations we will all be sentient, conscious and happy in a fast paced stressful environment.

experiencing something does not make it real. just ask a schizophrenic.

Except when the thing you're talking about is itself an experience, which is exactly what ego death is. What else would it be?

>What else would it be?

See the illogical choice of words you used at the end there?

>I don't believe continuity of identity actually exists in any setting, brain based or otherwise. That's basic ego death 101 shit
your subjective experience does not invalidate my subjective experience. Also, the fact that you describe ego death as "an experience" indicates that you have incorporated it into your sense of identity and that you experienced it at some level through the lens of consciousness.

It's not illogical to ask you what else it would be.
You're wrongly assuming experience existing means continuity of identity is a literal thing that exists and could be carried over or not carried over to an artificial substrate.
Memories of experiences don't confer continuity of identity as an actual thing unless you believe two people given the same memory would become the same person. Again, it's a narrative convenience that makes referencing behavior simpler than it is in reality, not some actual thing you could ever isolate and carry over to an an artificial replacement brain. The "just a copy" thing seems so clearly lacking to people because it'a a thought experiment where multiple versions of a source mind can exist at the same time, but really it's just makig it easier to see the lack of existence that the notion of self continity always had even just in the context of one non-duplicated brain. Brain activity from moment to moment can seem to share in an identity in the same way a line of ten rocks could be thought of as one object instead of ten (or to go further, all the particles making up each rock are grouped together in a way that isn't inherently necessary to do either).
Proximity in space and time make behaving *as though* a continued identity exists, but nothing of this pretend identity can be carried over anywhere.

>two people given the same memory would become the same person.
Of course not