Asklemmy

44173 readers

1795 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

147

Would you use teleporter technology if it existed? Why or Why not? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

321 comments fedilink hide all child comments

You know those sci-fi teleporters like in Star Trek where you disappear from one location then instantaneously reappear in another location? Do you trust that they are safe to use?

To fully understand my question, you need to understand the safety concerns regarding teleporters as explained in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQHBAdShgYI

spoiler

I wouldn't, because the person that reappears aint me, its a fucking clone. Teleporters are murder machines. Star Trek is a silent massacre!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] penguin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Consciousness is not based on memory or else computers would be considered conscious.

And if according to what you're saying, a clone with all of your memories would mean you have two points of view. I could take your clone into a different room and you'd be able to tell me what they see. But it obviously wouldn't work like that because your own sense of self would still be locked in your head and the clone would get its own sense of self, albeit one with the same memories.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Consciousness is not based on memory or else computers would be considered conscious.

What i meant is, memory plays a key role.

Consciousness is, simplified, a set of self-feeding loops over input and memory, with emotions and attention (Amygdala) as regulatory mechanism.

would mean you have two points of view.

No, the input is not shared between two beings, even if there are two of the same.

and the clone would get its own sense of self, albeit one with the same memories.

Exactly. But because he has the same body, same memories and same feelings, he is you. Which would change with time if the original you is not deconstructed, because the "you" of today is not the "you" of yesterday because of memories, genexpression, yadda yadda.

[–] penguin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

There is no reason what you describe should give rise to consciousness rather than a biological artificial intelligence. The sense of self, the perspective that feels like me peering out through my eyes, is not explained by anything you said.

A copy of me does not equal me because we'd both have separate senses of self. Having copied memories does nothing to affect that.