I wouldn’t. Immortality sounds miserable to me.

  • 667@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are arguments which state that when you “transfer” consciousness, there is no continuity of consciousness, meaning we are at best making a copy and destroying the original. While your copy would wake up as though nothing happened, the original you gets destroyed in the process and never actually gets to enjoy the transference.

    • nixl@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This. That’s one of the dilemmas with making clones of people. It’s already hard to pinpoint that exact integrity of a human (cells are constantly changing) and replacing them altogether just doesn’t make sense anymore. Pragmatically speaking, it won’t benefit you at the slightest, but, provided your clone is the exact copy, your friends might not see the difference. Even still, would they still be your friends whilst knowing the “true” you is gone?

    • stephfinitely@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This 100%. It’s also why teleporting like in star
      Terk isn’t really teleporting. It’s a weird version of cloning. So while a version of the consciousness goes on the original basically died.