From: Matt Mahoney (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Feb 11 2009 - 16:09:27 MST
--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Johnicholas Hines <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Matt Mahoney
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> > your carbon version becomes a zombie and is led off to
> the recycling vats, screaming in protest as they always do.
> You imply that people who advocate uploading technologies would put a
> perfectly viable human into a "recycling vat" (presumed fatal). This
> is a red herring and a straw man. Some people are advocating
> destructive uploading technologies. However, the people who advocate
> uploading technologies would agree; a non-destructive scan followed by
> murder of the person scanned is reprehensible.
> The actual scenario looks more like this: Due to illness and/or old
> age, someone is destructively uploaded. They are frozen and then
> sliced thinly in order for the scanning process to take place. There
> isn't a non-destructive technology available, nor does this process,
> in course of operation, produce any viable physical human who is then
In what manner must you die in order for your consciousness to successfully transfer to a machine?
> I invite Dr. Mahoney to state explicitly: "It is wrong to
> murder, enslave, or torture humans. It is also wrong to murder,
> enslave, or torture entities which are very structurally similar to
> humans, even if they are technically mutually infertile and therefore
> a different species."
First answer the following:
1. At what point after conception does life begin?
2. Under what conditions is capital punishment justified?
3. Under what conditions is euthanasia justified?
4. Which species besides humans should be protected from murder, enslavement, and torture?
5. What test must a program be able to pass to grant it human rights?
-- Matt Mahoney, firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 19 2013 - 04:01:43 MDT