https://youtu.be/kkcyyw22ima?si=rzok4lvxekul2fbe
Ich habe gerade ein YouTube -Video gepostet, das postuliert, dass die Technologie für Unsterblichkeit auf eine interessante Weise bereits vorhanden ist.
Die Prämisse ist im Grunde, dass jedes Mal, wenn wir unsere gelebten Erlebnisse (über Video oder Foto) erfassen und sie in eine digitale Datenbank hochladen (Cloud oder sogar Kaltspeicher, wenn sie in Zukunft öffentlich zugänglich ist), dazu zu der zukünftigen Fähigkeit, sich selbst zu klonen und für immer zu leben. (Ich artikuliere es im Video viel besser).
Was denkst du?
(Nicht versuchen, etwas zu verkaufen oder sich zu stark in Selbstwerbung zu verwöhnen, möchte nur offene Diskussionen über diese unterhaltsame Prämisse führen.)
Digitization of Memories = Digital Immortality
byu/OddToba inFuturology
3 Kommentare
There are many ways you can weasel your way to such a conclusion. By a similar logic some may argue that literature made historical figures such as Leonidas immortal.
The one hard question for immortality is and remains: how can you ever achieve the transference of the self? The subjective experience that makes you ‚you‘?
Because no doubt you will be able to create a clone – digital or biological – but *you* would just witness this newborn being emerge, claiming your name and identity as your natural time keeps running out.
In cloning yourself, whether from digital or biological material, you would be creating new life – not prolonging yours.
It is not immortality, for it is not you anymore, it’s another being.
When will these videos and photos also capture your emotional connection to those memories? A picture is not a memory. A memory contains more than an image. It contains context. This is why things like ptsd exists. The memory carries with it a correlation to an emotional context. Let me know how you would accomplish that?
No. Plainly no.
„You“ are more than your memories at any given point in time. Even if your full set of memories in a given moment could be digitized and then set into interactive motion, you would still be, inconveniently, you. *You*, from your perspective, would continue living separately from digital you. From that point, *your* future experiences would diverge sharply from digital you, and *you* would acquire none of the benefits of semi-eternal living that digital you might receive.
So a separate entity might wake up fully believing it’s you, but YOU would most certainly disagree.
Anyway, we at this point in our technological misadventures, we have no evidence to suggest that this will ever be actually possible. So consider what might be a more feasible long-term goal: simply recording memories. Those recorded memories might be able to live semi-forever in digital form, but that’s more like a movie being preserved digitally forever than it is like immortality for a person. Memories change with age and experience, so memories alone do not a person make. Recording memories therefore cannot grant immortality. It can only serve as a record of the past, much the same as recording devices can create for us records of past events.