This seems like a useful criterion. I would say “all the memories of cryonauts are very likely permanently gone” which I think is stronger than “cryonics is unlikely to prevent information theoretic death”.
“Who knows, maybe you can get quite close without any physically preserved brain at all.”
By what ratio do you think cryogenically preserving the brain improves the chances that someone you identify with will exist in the far future?
I am reluctant to give a ratio but my guess is that the improvement is significant. Personally I am not thrilled by cryonics for a completely different reason, namely I’m not sure the value of restoring my life at a point in the future in which civilization has advanced much beyond its current state is more than the value of things I can do with my money in the present, in particular things that increase the probability this advanced civilization will actually come to pass.
Also we don’t have cryonics in Israel so I don’t have to decide now anyway.
“at least some extent of memory restoration …”
This seems like a useful criterion. I would say “all the memories of cryonauts are very likely permanently gone” which I think is stronger than “cryonics is unlikely to prevent information theoretic death”.
“Who knows, maybe you can get quite close without any physically preserved brain at all.”
By what ratio do you think cryogenically preserving the brain improves the chances that someone you identify with will exist in the far future?
I am reluctant to give a ratio but my guess is that the improvement is significant. Personally I am not thrilled by cryonics for a completely different reason, namely I’m not sure the value of restoring my life at a point in the future in which civilization has advanced much beyond its current state is more than the value of things I can do with my money in the present, in particular things that increase the probability this advanced civilization will actually come to pass. Also we don’t have cryonics in Israel so I don’t have to decide now anyway.