I am not a fan of cryonics because I know that freezing, regardless of method, is a very good way to destroy tissue; and I would like to see some more evidence towards what actually constitutes memory and other brain-related stuff, so as to make sure the freezing method doesn’t wreck it, before I buy into it.
Oh oh. That argument was just removed. Now what are you going to do? You can make up a new one to support your existing conclusion or you could make up a new conclusion based on what you know.
This seems needlessly confrontational, especially as a comment to a newcomer.
That would seem to be in the eye of the beholder. I saw it as an opportunity to demonstrate mastery of the most basic principle of lesswrong and instantly raise his standing in the tribe and reputation for sanity.
All right, I’ll play ball.
If my devoting my career to AI research fails to make FAI, sure, I’ll buy into cryonics.
Right now I am 19 years old, poor as dirt, lives with my parents, healthy lifestyle, careful to the point of paranoia; show me a cryonics establishment in Denmark and I will reserve a space when I have the funding. (the “show me” is a rethoric, I intend to find out myself)
I am generally optimistic with regards to FAI, and I am no strong Bayesian at all. You have a point, yeah, plain as day.
And thank you Kaj_Sotala, for taking up on this, frankly not at all “fun” or “inviting” and, yes, frankly quite “needlessly confrontational,” yet still true counterargument.
wedrifid; there is a time to be direct and insulting in a playful kind of way. You need to learn when that time is.
ETA: After a brief lookup of the term “Vitrification” i find the term “Toxicity” to feature, along with “Optimistic of the future.” I am not sure what to think here, compelling arguments can be made for each.
ETA: After a brief lookup of the term “Vitrification” i find the term “Toxicity” to feature, along with “Optimistic of the future.” I am not sure what to think here, compelling arguments can be made for each.
The toxicity isn’t a problem if it’s going to be a brain upload, but it is a valid concern for any attempt at resurrecting the wetware.
Sorry, you pointed out a counterargument made by Vladimir_Nesov, in a confrontational manner.
Also, thank your for reminding me that I have to sharpen my posting abilities.
Vladimir Nesov made a very true counterargument, you endorsed it to test my ability to change my standpoint. Nothing wrong with that; and lo and behold, I actually have. Congratulations, you and Vladimir_Nesov both get an upvote from the new guy.
Congratulations, you and Vladimir_Nesov both get an upvote from the new guy.
Thankyou! Respond positively and thinking clearly despite (being primed to) consider an interaction to be a confrontation is potentially even more valuable trait to signal than ability to update freely. A valuable newcomer indeed!
Oh oh. That argument was just removed. Now what are you going to do? You can make up a new one to support your existing conclusion or you could make up a new conclusion based on what you know.
Welcome to lesswrong.
This seems needlessly confrontational, especially as a comment to a newcomer.
That would seem to be in the eye of the beholder. I saw it as an opportunity to demonstrate mastery of the most basic principle of lesswrong and instantly raise his standing in the tribe and reputation for sanity.
I reject your accusation!
My apologies for the misinterpretation, then.
All right, I’ll play ball. If my devoting my career to AI research fails to make FAI, sure, I’ll buy into cryonics.
Right now I am 19 years old, poor as dirt, lives with my parents, healthy lifestyle, careful to the point of paranoia; show me a cryonics establishment in Denmark and I will reserve a space when I have the funding. (the “show me” is a rethoric, I intend to find out myself)
I am generally optimistic with regards to FAI, and I am no strong Bayesian at all. You have a point, yeah, plain as day.
And thank you Kaj_Sotala, for taking up on this, frankly not at all “fun” or “inviting” and, yes, frankly quite “needlessly confrontational,” yet still true counterargument.
wedrifid; there is a time to be direct and insulting in a playful kind of way. You need to learn when that time is.
ETA: After a brief lookup of the term “Vitrification” i find the term “Toxicity” to feature, along with “Optimistic of the future.” I am not sure what to think here, compelling arguments can be made for each.
The toxicity isn’t a problem if it’s going to be a brain upload, but it is a valid concern for any attempt at resurrecting the wetware.
I didn’t make a counterargument of any kind.
Sorry, you pointed out a counterargument made by Vladimir_Nesov, in a confrontational manner.
Also, thank your for reminding me that I have to sharpen my posting abilities.
Vladimir Nesov made a very true counterargument, you endorsed it to test my ability to change my standpoint. Nothing wrong with that; and lo and behold, I actually have. Congratulations, you and Vladimir_Nesov both get an upvote from the new guy.
Thankyou! Respond positively and thinking clearly despite (being primed to) consider an interaction to be a confrontation is potentially even more valuable trait to signal than ability to update freely. A valuable newcomer indeed!