Expelled from Paradise (movie)

[Mr. G]

The wiki page for the movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled_from_Paradise

I watched this science fiction movie recently because it's script was written by Urobuchi (yes, that was the only reason), but it's very different from his other work (though that perhaps means that he did not have that much control over the scrip). One interesting thing this film has is that it depicts the Earth after the "Nano Hazard" (whose details are not explailed but apparently most of Earth was left in ruins and I guess it was kind of a self replicating nanomatter that devoured most of the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo)), anyway as of the time depicted in the film 98% of the world's population has been living as digital minds in a virtual reality in a space station DEVA. Interestingly it is I think the first film I have watched to explicitly talk about such a society where humans have left their physical bodies completely behind. They are still born as babies then their minds are supposedly "digitized" at the age of 60 days. The film did not depict that process explicitly though.

Interestingly, it never addresses some questions regarding the continuity of consciousness when your mind is copied from one container to another. It's similar to the paradox of the transporter as digitizing your mind is equivalent to making a copy of it, right? Though the digital copies would feel like their minds as a continuous from their flesh state to their digital state, so I guess it's okay for them, they can be understood as digital minds that are made from physical blueprints which are later discarded.

Also like anime in general it shows some of the obssession with mecha as 1/3 of the movie is mecha action scenes. Mecha look cool in a way since they are literal humanoid representations of military technology.

[biostem]

"They are still born as babies then their minds are supposedly "digitized" at the age of 60 days"

The human mind is not developed fully until, what, the early to late teens? What is the point of even conceiving the babies and bringing them to term? Is it that the computer needs the genetic makeup of each unique individual, in order to "digitize" their mind and create a proper extrapolation of what their adult self will be like? I mean, within this setting, why not just create AIs as needed, using an algorithm that incorporates some random variables in order to maintain diversity?

[Joun_Lord]

Maybe they were intended to go back to meat-bag form when they could get a handle on the nano problem. AI constructs probably aren't going to be the best at raising babies and rebuilding society in meat-bag form. By using human brains as templates to create these upload programs they can probably easily download them into cloned human bodies to boink and do their taxes. An AI wouldn't have the necessary "software" base to run in a human body.

Judging by the wiki page they do upload human programs into human bodies, as they did with the main character. But considering resources and living space are probably high limited most people stay in VR. The wiki also mentions a deep space colonization program. Having humans as just programs in a system with no physical body could be a massive space saver. They travel to their new home and new bodies are grown there.

Plus I'd assume the uploading of humans is about saving the human race, even in a bastardized form. Just creating AI doods to run around the Meatrix doesn't do much for saving Hugh Manns.

Thats if they can even create AI in the first place. Even if they could they might not want to considering Earth was already devastated by machines. Putting the last remnants of humanity in control of more machines that potentially could go rogue too probably isn't a good idea. Referring to the wiki again, it mentions a fear of AI in this setting.

[Mr. G]

"They are still born as babies then their minds are supposedly "digitized" at the age of 60 days"

The human mind is not developed fully until, what, the early to late teens? What is the point of even conceiving the babies and bringing them to term? Is it that the computer needs the genetic makeup of each unique individual, in order to "digitize" their mind and create a proper extrapolation of what their adult self will be like? I mean, within this setting, why not just create AIs as needed, using an algorithm that incorporates some random variables in order to maintain diversity?

Well, maybe that means they have the technology to make a 60 days old mind develop normally as a human mind would in digital form but not the technology to program something that can just generate adult human minds.

[Mr. G]

Besides, has the question of preserving continuity of conscience while transferring from "vessel" to "vessel" has been seriously considered by anybody?

[Cykeisme]

The nature of consciousness, and the "self", is a pretty big thing. It's been considered a lot, most of the folks on this board have probably given it a significant amount of thought at least once at some point in their lives.

To briefly touch on that, I think it's fairly obvious that "moving" the mind from one container to another (whether from meat to hardware, hardware to hardware, hardware to meat, or meat to meat) essentially results in the termination of the previous consciousness and the creation of a new, identical one.

I'd use to consider this a lot, but it was only when I read the book Old Man's War, that I saw a fictional consciousness transfer that does indeed seem to maintain continuity of the individual throughout the transfer. I'd elaborate if you want, but it's a great book, and I suggest you read it if this is something that you think about a lot

[bilateralrope]

To briefly touch on that, I think it's fairly obvious that "moving" the mind from one container to another (whether from meat to hardware, hardware to hardware, hardware to meat, or meat to meat) essentially results in the termination of the previous consciousness and the creation of a new, identical one.

What's not obvious is the answer to the question: Why does that matter ?

[Borgholio]

What's not obvious is the answer to the question: Why does that matter ?

Had a discussion about this in another thread long ago. Nobody really shared my opinion, but it happened to mirror Cykeisme's so let me see if I can help explain.

The general idea is that if my mind is transferred into a backup body or a machine before I die, then I'm pretty much reincarnated. Since the sum of human experience and personality is basically data in the brain, the only thing that matters is if there is a complete copy of that data stored somewhere. As long as the data lives, I live.

At least, that's the idea.

My issue was a matter of perspective. Let's say right now I'm laying in a hospital bed, dying. Someone puts a helmet on me and makes an exact, perfect copy of my brain and puts it in a computer, or a clone, or some other kind of receptacle. Then I die. Well, my brain was copied into another vessel. From the point of view of the copy, I got a new lease on life. From the point of view of everybody watching, I was reborn in a new body and I'm not really dead. But from the point of view of my original body...I'm still going to die.

Think about it for a moment. You're laying a hospital bed and you see your clone wake up and walk around. Or you see the hard drive with your brain contents on it. But you are still there, laying in bed, looking at the world from a consciousness that will soon cease to exist. At the moment of divergence, you and your copies are different people. So while Borgholio v2.0 might be walking around and getting ready to reassure his wife and family that he's ok now, Borgholio 1.0 is laying in bed, watching his doppelganger go to take over his life.

So from the perspective of the source material, it matters a great deal. Hopefully that helped explain it.

[bilateralrope]

Borgholio, I mostly agree with you. A single copy of me is fine, and something I see as a continuation of my life. A backup that was made some time before the death of one body being loaded into a new body after the previous body dies is acceptable if the backup is recent, but not ideal.

Having multiple simultaneous copies running at the same time is a problem.

I asked the question because it seems that Cykeisme disagrees because he is putting some importance on the termination of one consciousness. But I can't be sure unless he elaborates his position.

[Borgholio]

he is putting some importance on the termination of one consciousness.

That's how I interpreted it. If YOU are the consciousness being terminated, it'll feel pretty damn important to you.

[Joun_Lord]

Borgholio, I mostly agree with you. A single copy of me is fine, and something I see as a continuation of my life. A backup that was made some time before the death of one body being loaded into a new body after the previous body dies is acceptable if the backup is recent, but not ideal.

Having multiple simultaneous copies running at the same time is a problem.

I asked the question because it seems that Cykeisme disagrees because he is putting some importance on the termination of one consciousness. But I can't be sure unless he elaborates his position.

The termination of consciousness is a problem because by the view of the person being terminated they are dying and will be dead despite a copy bring made. Which is what it is, a copy, not the original person, not a continuation of that person except in some bastardized form. Essentially a whole other person with the original persons memories and personality loaded on it.

Of course it comes down to what you think makes a person themselves. Is a person just information or is it something more? If you make a copy of yourself to replace a dying you, you might consider it just a continuation of yourself. But is it really? If you copy a DVD and destroy the original is it still the same DVD? What about if you have the original and copy both?

A clone of yourself made to replace a dying you could be considered a continuation in some form, your lights go out and his comes on, there is no real interruption of consciousness by his point of view. But its still just technically a copy and not you. You are dead, there is an identical imposter in your place. If there was some way to transfer you consciousness, your being or soul or whatever, to the new body rather then just creating a copy then it would be different. Essentially like scooping out the brain without scooping out the brain.

But just copying you doesn't save you, it saves a version of you sure but the you that exists now as a conscious individual is not saved in the process. Or maybe it is.

Say you have a computer that goes down, the hard drive is fucked up. You clone the drive to an identical drive and plug it back in the computer. All the same hardware is there, all the same information is there, by the computers point of view it is unchanged, it went off and came back on with no difference to it. Is it still the same computer? Take a computer and completely copy it, all the information, all the hardware, all the dings in the case and stickers and what haves you that people slap on their computers. The computers are completely identical but they aren't the same computer.

Now a copy of you running around after you are gone is better then nothing, part of you survives. Its much like having kids, a part of you survives. But like having kids, the copy of you running around, eating your cereal, making hanky panky with your significant other (would a copy of someone still be married, they are technically the same person but at the same time not and the person technically died even if he is still running around), and fucking about with your stuff doesn't mean YOU are. You dead.

[bilateralrope]

Of course it comes down to what you think makes a person themselves. Is a person just information or is it something more?

Pretty much. This question will lead to a lot of argument and neither side is obviously correct.

The only thing that is clear is that if the technology to do this with humans is possible, then the people who see it as a continuation of themselves will use it for what they see as an extended lifespan. Those who don't see it that way won't use it, and will thus be outnumbered over time.

[Joun_Lord]

I think even most people who don't see it as a continuation of themselves would probably do it. Even if they die a part of them might live on. I can see that happening even if its confirmed to be a copy.

Even if its proven that you yourself is the one that makes the transfer, sucks you out of your skull or complete removal of the brain, I could see people not wanting to do it for various reasons. First and foremost is religious reasons, kinda hard to ascend to heaven if you are playing around in a computer system. They would also have quite a few problems with mind cloning much as they might have with human cloning, the resulting organism (if you can even call a mind uploaded human that) would be a soulless abomination. For mind uploading itself they might say that a they are no longer human even though they started out human and are verifiable not a copy but the original person just in a different medium. A mind in a computer or a brain in a chair hooked up to a computer isn't a human being. Probably by current definitions they wouldn't be, I dunno. I could certainly see groups like fundie Christians and Muslims or the Amish not wanting to have anything to do with this tech beyond railing at it for being "teh evillzzz!"

Others might have problems of being attached to their bodies too much to let go. They wouldn't feel human in a computer system or a android body even if they can fully simulate the feeling of a body. There is also a biological component. A mind in a computer or a brain in a jar will not be able to reproduce atleast not without some serious outside help (preserved or cloned tissue slapped together in an artificial womb after the peoples avatars do the nasty, probably could even have feedback or physical altering of the avatar/android body so the female.....or male could still look and feel pregnant and still feel when the baby kicks and all that). A person who isn't a baby factory is no longer human. I mean hell we had some nutter here saying women who couldn't have children weren't actually women much to the chagrin of I think Broomstick.

I could see alot of people attached to their bodies be more willing to get their skulls vacuumed later in life or when they are ill. Death has a way of making people consider even alternatives they wouldn't have before. Being on deaths lists will make some old fart or cancer ridden person sign up to get copied or downloaded even if it there is a good chance it isn't them that will be left afterwards, just a version of them.

Finally there will be people who won't want to do so just because they don't want to live forever or even much longer then they should. Not suicidal people so much, but just people who for whatever reason don't want to live really even 100 years much less multiple centuries or much much longer. Such technologies will probably have safeties in place that make it so much harder to die then you could IRL. You probably couldn't just pull the plug on yourself, you'd probably have to go to court or something to fight for your right to die much like with modern cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Imagine someone wanting to die but being forced to stay alive in a computer, no matter what they do they can't die, they are immortal, they are just codes or a brain far removed from harm and jumping off buildings, shooting them self, stabbing them self, watching Star Trek Nemesis on repeat, or hanging yourself doesn't do shit, might not even hurt.

Sounds kinda horrifying and sad.

[Borgholio]

Pretty much. This question will lead to a lot of argument and neither side is obviously correct.

Yeah basically you need to consider if humans have a soul, if the soul is separate from the information contained in the brain, and if it can be copied as well. Then there's the issue of whether not a person is considered dead if the original consciousness ends, even though a duplicate continues in a new body or a computer.

So it can get messy trying to discuss this...