klaitnerTue, Oct 19, 2010 so nice to sit down and read, thank you for a wonderful article Wildcat
"so a part of us (at present it is partial but as life-streaming goes mainstream, in due time all of our lives will be accessible) is readily accessible even if our immediate conscious awareness is not."
this is the moulted shell not the bug - I get that it is interesting that we are 'accessible' in a manner of speaking when we are offline, but this goes back to the value of concurrency, the 'splash' of two minds meeting in real time (originally wrote meating, perhaps more interesting..) this is not the same as correspondance in a context asynchronously. our memories, being constructed not stored are far more interesting than what actually happened (and I don't mean that in the simple sense of embellishment or revisionist history). I have read stuff I have written even only a year ago and accidentally missing the author, thought I was reading someone else's comments, very strange feeling indeed. you cannot step in the same river twice.
"At present I do not think that the virtual mind universe generates simultaneous everywhereness by itself, but as the evolution of the net progresses and our co-involvement in it, I firmly believe that it will"
"our memories are somehow disembodied"
something far more interesting than uploading our brains is afoot, but an uploaded brain snapshot complete with dynamics would indeed be disembodied memory, living in the same sense as our own minds, but perhaps without the decay and subsequent sensory accumulation, it would indeed be interesting to talk to that former-self-in-stasis.
"the times we operate upon within our minds cohere via our embodiment"
exactly why I think uploading a brain will be dispersive and as such 'unsuccessful', there will be no coherence, we would have to program a virtual meat sack for the program to function - what is more interesting is the liberation, gradually of the coherent mind within its meat sack, and the 'enlightenment' that would represent. we already feel the lessened grip of time on us with asynchronicity so well managed on the web. next up is loosening the grip of identities (single to multiple to (next step) emergent). once time and identity are loosed there is only sustaining this meat sack, which I hope to fix with *net. what we will do as a species at that point is quite unknowable, but exciting.
" At that point the meat narrative of the individual as such will transform into an aggregate like system of multiple coherencies to which we will need address the question of designation of identity and such"
on what basis will these processes cohere in any meaningful way without the meat container? as a "point of curiosity" - selfish patterns? attractors? where is beauty?
"There is no need to leave the concept of the individual all together but change it or upgrade it so it can encompass a larger entity, extended via hyperconnectivity across times and spaces."
The individual as generative will remain (and should) the individual as evidenced will evolve (and should). if we are able to generate a coherent (contained) artificial replica of mind, generative may transcend the individual - this would be a strange existence for the meat mind to be a part of. ringing of ringing. may lead to insanity in undeveloped meat minds (perhaps catastrophic incoherence in the artificial ones?). there will be no room for clinging.
"#DD :”What are the pros and cons of all of this?”
Mu
so nice to sit down and read, thank you for a wonderful article Wildcat
"so a part of us (at present it is partial but as life-streaming goes mainstream, in due time all of our lives will be accessible) is readily accessible even if our immediate conscious awareness is not."
this is the moulted shell not the bug - I get that it is interesting that we are 'accessible' in a manner of speaking when we are offline, but this goes back to the value of concurrency, the 'splash' of two minds meeting in real time (originally wrote meating, perhaps more interesting..) this is not the same as correspondance in a context asynchronously. our memories, being constructed not stored are far more interesting than what actually happened (and I don't mean that in the simple sense of embellishment or revisionist history). I have read stuff I have written even only a year ago and accidentally missing the author, thought I was reading someone else's comments, very strange feeling indeed. you cannot step in the same river twice.
"At present I do not think that the virtual mind universe generates simultaneous everywhereness by itself, but as the evolution of the net progresses and our co-involvement in it, I firmly believe that it will"
"our memories are somehow disembodied"
something far more interesting than uploading our brains is afoot, but an uploaded brain snapshot complete with dynamics would indeed be disembodied memory, living in the same sense as our own minds, but perhaps without the decay and subsequent sensory accumulation, it would indeed be interesting to talk to that former-self-in-stasis.
"the times we operate upon within our minds cohere via our embodiment"
exactly why I think uploading a brain will be dispersive and as such 'unsuccessful', there will be no coherence, we would have to program a virtual meat sack for the program to function - what is more interesting is the liberation, gradually of the coherent mind within its meat sack, and the 'enlightenment' that would represent. we already feel the lessened grip of time on us with asynchronicity so well managed on the web. next up is loosening the grip of identities (single to multiple to (next step) emergent). once time and identity are loosed there is only sustaining this meat sack, which I hope to fix with *net. what we will do as a species at that point is quite unknowable, but exciting.
" At that point the meat narrative of the individual as such will transform into an aggregate like system of multiple coherencies to which we will need address the question of designation of identity and such"
on what basis will these processes cohere in any meaningful way without the meat container? as a "point of curiosity" - selfish patterns? attractors? where is beauty?
"There is no need to leave the concept of the individual all together but change it or upgrade it so it can encompass a larger entity, extended via hyperconnectivity across times and spaces."
The individual as generative will remain (and should) the individual as evidenced will evolve (and should). if we are able to generate a coherent (contained) artificial replica of mind, generative may transcend the individual - this would be a strange existence for the meat mind to be a part of. ringing of ringing. may lead to insanity in undeveloped meat minds (perhaps catastrophic incoherence in the artificial ones?). there will be no room for clinging.
"#DD :”What are the pros and cons of all of this?”
Mu