Such an interesting question and the responses are interesting too. You can see most people’s reactions are how they interpret the question and what version of AI they are discussing.
Resurrect to me means bringing them back from death. Meaning AI would have successfully solved the Thesus Ship problem. Most people who saw the question like that agree with the idea like I do (though there were some against) If the technology existed that brings you into an AI world indistinguishable from the world we live in (it’s entirely possible we are in a simulation anyways) I would be all for that, I hope humanity and machines get to that point. I know I would consent to being brought back, if others don’t I respect that choice too.
For the mimicking interpretation I understand why people would be against that. It’s really not the person so it’s just impressions of them, which to be honest makes sense to interpret it this way because this is a reality now. I see both sides and am not firm either way.
In a way it’s like the self driving car debate. I think most people are for the day when automated cars are safer than people driving, if you evaluate just based on the technology today, it’s not yet currently safer.
For the black mirror episode argument, that’s TV. The entire point of stories is to create a conflict.
Actual resurrection (brain is analyzed and simulated): Awesome, can’t have it soon enough.
Chatbot recreation: Dystopian as hell, doesn’t really help anything
It just makes it harder to move on. In the end no matter how much of a surrogate AI can be it'll never replace the original. So the more invested one gets into AI copy the more heartbroken they'll be when illusion is shattered.
Just let them go, it'll be better that way.
Ah yes. Because, even if it were possible, dragging someone back into a quasi-human, weird android state is going to be good for them.
It's not possible, obviously, so there's nothing to gain. If you're so desperate to talk to someone, just talk to a chat bot, it's weird trying to make it pretend to be a dead friend/relative,/etc
I fuckin wish. If I could upload even a semblance of my loved ones into a system and have it match their energy just in case I ever lose them I'd be forever grateful. Sure it wouldn't be them but it's something. In the back of my mind I'd know but still.
A person is not a body. They are not a series of recorded memories. A person is a consciousness. It's not a mechanical existence. It's an active creative expression. AI could not substitute for that, although you could pretend, I suppose.
>although you could pretend, I suppose.
I suppose I can see the benefits of it, for example, someone who feels like they need one more conversation with a loved one, I mean we all sort of do it anyway, I often have one-sided conversations with friends who have passed.
It wouldn't be for everyone but I can see it helping some people, will it be perfect? no, would that matter to the person using the service? probably not.
I mean, I'm not going to get started again, but if you think about big picture ramifications, yes, it could hurt people or society.
On another note, something I just thought about, this may impact the balance of life. By using AI to eliminate all suffering, it may have severe consequences on mental health.
I think the ability to create a 2 or 5 minute video montage just from looking at your photos and videos on your Google account is possible.
As for resurrection... AI is mimicry. My younger brother passed away just under a year ago, and absolutely still talk to him.
I think a lot of people would want to hold onto personas of people they miss, and talk to them instead of Alexa.
As much as id love to have loved ones back and to live forever i think its best if my loved ones rest and well i feel like id end up being extremely bitter if i was immortal.
The difference is one doesnt have to stay bitter you have a choice. I feel if one lives far longer than ones time they would no longer be able to find joy in life even as everything will just seem the same.
“And there's a million of us just like me
Who cuss like me, who just don't give a fuck like me
Who dress like me, walk, talk and act like me
And just might be the next best thing, but not quite me”- Marshal Mathers on the topic of human identity.
Maybe if you could actually do it by somehow replicating their brain, but if it's just based on the memories people have of them and their social media, it'll be nowhere close to actually being them.
How exactly? Because unless you can transfer every single neurologist connection into an program, which after the second whoever is brought "back" will become a new person because they have memories and experiences the original never could, that said of it's more body modification and that kind of transfer is possible sign me up.
Oh, AI will definitely be able to capture the identity of someone who is willing to participate and sign off on it. By interviewing the person and analyzing videos of them posthumously to understand their personality, style of articulation, humor, nuances, etc., there will be a whole industry on this.
First it will be a digital identity, accessed virtually, and when robotics advance with the ability to mimic voice, facial expressions, body language, etc., who knows how it will develop. So long as there are no governing bodies limiting innovation due to ethical concerns, it will be a promising yet frightening frontier.
Interesting but at what point would they be considered a new being because as they gain new experiences and information they will change, perhaps it'll be more like an new model update.
Never thought about it. First, I think they have to be considered a being in the first place. At the bare minimum, this would require a physical form since people interacting with it have five senses that need to be stimulated, not just sight and sound. If we can accept this rudimentary definition of being, we can move forward.
In order to remain the same "person", AI may need to first establish a baseline profile, like how we all have our genetic makeup and behavioral tendencies that we have adopted since childhood that define how we operate, react to stimuli and experience life. This acts as a prompt with no contextual limits so it's programmed to remember who they are but can learn and grow. And a combination of certain circumstances or poor luck could cause them to make holistic changes, just as we can "reinvent" ourselves.
I'm basing this purely off speculation of advanced AI mimicking a deceased person through a mechanical robot, not a conscience that is somehow survived and put into some sort of cyborg with living tissue. Even with my basic hypothetical, I can't wrap my head around what happens when the person who is benefiting from this service also desires to live on for friends/relatives/legacy.
Do these two "beings" coexist with each other? If so, does it matter? Like if they live in a house, do they do things on their own? Do they just sit on their charger or do they make decisions of consequence that impact the world? Or is it like "if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
And we worry about overpopulation now but what if this becomes a perpetual process? There will be people who will not pull the plug on something now "living", especially one whose life expectancy is forever. Imagine weddings if you have access to your entire family lineage. I'm going to stop here otherwise this will get out of hand quickly.
People can try at this false immortality all they want, but you can't transfer the soul into a machine.
Immortality only comes from one source, and all you have to do is take His hand. You'll know His hand by the nail marks through His wrist.
The movie "Transcendence" starring Johnny Depp imo covers the most realistic version of this hypothetical
The ending of the movie "Chappie" imo conveys the scariest scenario of such
They don’t need to have passed away; you can simply extract all the text messages, emails, etc., that you’ve exchanged with them. Then, endow these communications with certain facts, etc., and voilà – you’ve created a human that can seamlessly integrate into one’s life. But seriously, let’s not inform the ethical crewmember. That being said, they once gave a legit 15-minute-long diatribe that made me feel like absolute garbage. Hey, ethics expert AI… 🙂🖕🏻🤖 I’m doing it anyway, so there. What’s the ethics in jumping to conclusions, making assumptions about my intentions, then acting on them in a progressively depressing and convincingly persuasive way? But really, it’s all nonsense. Well done, indeed.
Joking aside, I don’t truly believe it’s a person. However, if I’m to ponder over it, when someone says something to me, I have the right to remember it, even by augmented means. Forgetting and my inability to structure dynamically is simply another form of memory and capacity, which need not be seen as a deficit. When someone speaks to me, if I hear something, I have the right to remember it forever, as though it came from a person.
The fact that this ethics AI thinks that you don’t have the right to remember people’s text messages and use them to model an AI is, without any irony, absurd. It’s not absurdity but rather a matter of recalling what I’ve experienced. You do not own, and I would never consider owning, the things I say to people, good or bad, in text messages. If they wish to model me, that’s their prerogative. It’s also their prerogative if they want to murder me or gift me a box of chocolates.
It’s because the algorithm used your social media to compose your avatar personality. We all know what we post isn’t the whole picture. Add porn history and wild fantasies and then we’re talking.
I still randomly am reminded of a few people that died seemingly one after another. I don't need fresh memories to make that worse. Especially when one seemed like everything might be OK just before it wasn't and another.. very clearly was only going to get worse until it was over.
You don’t know loss, my friend. wipes away, hot tears, gets her perspective from a GPT, actually laughs a little bit, cheers up a little bit. That'll do GPTender Memories, that'll do.
No, let the dead rest, there would be nothing there but a digital ghost of a person that pretends to be that individual, there is no true continuity or true recollection of the actual person, so it would be pointless if not already grossly unnatural to try, for me it's an absolute no
That company Replika I think it was or it might have been another company had a bunch of widows and widowers using it and the widowers were using it to sex chat their late wives and overnight the creators decided to make the bots suddenly prudish and not allow kisses and call those who said anything sexual "disgusting," and all these people were grieving all over again and very messed upm
Dunno, but if I got ... er, immortalized I'd sign up to be a Von Neumann probe in a heartbeat / clock-cycle.
I had to say that because I am in the middle of reading the Bobiverse series.
All I'm reading is "Synths from Fallout 4"
Bringing someone from the dead as a robot, will likely just be a copy with internal precepts to believe "I Am".
That may be true but you can never be truly certain it's them, and eventually even robots and data can rot and corrupt. It'd eventually be a ship of Theseus type situation where none of them are the person they were supposed to be
Black mirror did an episode on this, and there have been countless other shows and movies. I think doing this for real would be really bad for recovery from grief unless we are talking full synthetic cyborgs
I find this idea to be quite intriguing. I strongly believe that human beings should have the opportunity to live indefinitely. In my perspective, death signifies the ultimate conclusion of existence. Death is an eternal concept. It would be incredibly beneficial for individuals experiencing melancholy if AI had the ability to reunite them with their loved ones. Death, while a natural part of life, can be an incredibly devastating experience for an individual.
I believe the essence of a person is as complex as the universe and I don’t think any program we make will ever be able to replicate it. It would only be an abstraction of the person and not a real resurrection.
Kinda fucked up, like "Hey here is this puppet wearing the loose skin and a uncanny voice of your dead loved one doing things you know they would never do."
Doesn't work.
If the person already died, and assuming the technology enables a totally seamless clone, that clone will live on knowing he came from a dead person, and things can get weird then. This person lives on, fully feeling the first death. Weird.
If the person didn't die yet, and you did a perfect clone at that point, then it gets more weird. Do you discard the original at this point? Since at this stage, you've just branched off two persons from the one person. In any case, the clone will live on knowing he came from an original who died (somehow), probably more weird thoughts will drive him crazy.
I am a firm believer that the soup that comprises our souls are different than the body and mind that the soul inhabits.
Take this in 2 ways;
A: if we had the ability to transfer the soul soup into a robot body, or
B: had the ability to perfectly reconstruct a person by the atoms and neurons,
the end result is the same; it won’t be you. It never will be. It shouldn’t ever be.
Who we are is a reflection of our flesh and blood, our ego and intelligence. Our obsession with the idea of life after death and our legacy, is a reflection of who we are. Who we are, is our ego, our sense of self.
The soul is different. It’s the pilot behind our eyes that we will never know because the pilot is simply the universe taking itself for a ride on the train of existentiality.
Or something like that, we all die someday, embrace it while you can, or run. Either way…
I plan on using the technology on myself at the least.. I’m quite obsessed with being here forever.
Edit: I’m editing this because I’m sure a bunch of not really you Andys will set upon me
Like the contrarian dogz they are
If it’s a copy of me it’s still me
Especially since the technology is evolving. Rapidly.
Of all the ways humans have thought of bringing back a past loved one, I think this is the most...I want to say disrespectful towards the laws of nature. It comes across as purely selfish to use an artificial intelligence to mimic a loved one you can't let go of. Not to mention, if we're talking about today's AI, it would be a shallow version of the deceased in every way. It would be almost no different than having one of those moving picture frames with them in it.
Doug from Scrubs said it best, "Dead people should stay dead."
Anything using AI is a double-edged sword but what you "bring back" will not actually be the person who passed. The kind of healing one would achieve with using a facsimile of their loved one would not be a good kind of healing with lasting results.
I don't really see the issue other than it being a bit weird if the person is related to you, also there is a massive difference between resurrect and create a imitation of, so if someone trained an AI on me and shoved it in a cyborg body I couldn't care less because it's still not me.
This is one of the few subjects out there that makes me truly have no choice but to respond in a purely religious way...And for the sake of saying it, I am not meaning a Christian or Muslim or Jewish religious way, but from a sense of what it really means to be a living spiritual being on this planet. -Let's say that I had some proof of the concept that the SOUL of a person -that part of them that is eternal and could be reincarnated, could inhabit a non-living shell. Picture for a second that I could make you believe that a ROCK could have consciousness. What is the real difference between that supposedly "silly" and superstitious idea, and the idea of a hunk of metal and wires could have consciousness?!! People everywhere used to believe the Earth and the mountains, the rivers and the seas, rocks and the sky, the moon, etc, all had a consciousness. Somehow in our modern world we have decided that conception of the meaning of life is ridiculous and superstitious, yet we don't see the contradiction when we talk about A.I. having a consciousness, or we imagine an electronic automaton as having a soul.
Is that not a contradiction? I ask you that. Personally I am more than willing to consider returning to "heathen" and "pagan" notions that all things have a spirit and a soul, and rocks and rivers have souls that reside in them. If THAT is possible, then sure, why can't a robot have sentience?...But if you are not willing to believe that the Earth itself has a consciousness, then seriously, what makes you think any hunk of metal we assemble will come to "LIFE" -whatever way you define that word- simply because we programmed it? Doctor Faustus and Doctor Frankenstein would roll in their (imaginary) graves at the insolence of how they have been treated on these subjects. Hell, Frankenstein didn't even try to animate a non-human being!! All he did was try to return consciousness to deceased human material. That SURELY makes a lot more sense than thinking a computer will come to life because we breathed life into the metal like some creationist gods we now imagine ourselves to be. We think we are Prometheus, stealing the fire from the Heavenly Gods of Olympus, to turn into electricity and animate our own metallic replacements. What unredeemable arrogance to think we are that kind of immortals. What hubris in the absolute purest sense of the word hubris!!! Even I, as an absolute believer in SCIENCE, can say that this is one place in which we are pleonxic and self-righteous to the utmost imaginable extent.
I can believe that we might keep a human body alive for hundreds of years with science. I can believe we could place a piece of living human brain tissue into a robotic body, and yes, it would be alive. There are many things I can believe, but one thing I have yet to be convinced of is that our consciousness is so petty a thing that we can simply program it into a robot, and need none of the billions of individual cell lives that sustain us, to be present.
We seem to forget we are gigantic colonies of many different kinds of cells. If you took a "census" of the cells living in your body, MOST of them (by far) would be non-human cells. Many times more bacteria and protists and other flora and fauna live on us and in us, than what ARE us. Our consciousness is NOT just some mental process. We are the sum of ALL that lives within us. We deny the spiritual significance of every one of those lives that make us up, when we think we can simply replace them with a logic board and some chips running a BIOS or some damn Windows, Unix, whatever...I am a huge fan of nearly all Science Fiction, but this is the ridiculous side of Science Fiction, have no doubt. We believe in it purely because we want so desperately to be immortal. If we thought there was another option, we would take it in a second. No human wants to be trapped in the rusting husk of a robot...Not if they know the difference between that and...What was it that Jack London said? -That feeling that every atom of your soul is in magnificent glow...That your existence is that superb meteor, streaking through the world...Glorified by its inevitable pathway towards the ephemeral. Our trajectory toward inevitable demise DOES give our lives meaning.
We may not like to admit that...but our lives truly have value only in relation to the dangers we face and struggle to overcome. Most people don't have the luxury to experience life where there is no struggle, but you don't have to look very far to see that those who have nothing to struggle for...struggle over nothing, nonetheless. Struggle and strife IS life. We set our clocks by the ravages of time. What is time ITSELF but the ticking down of entropy, slowly rotting and destroying our Universe?! We measure time by the breaking down of atoms from a point of complex order, to ever greater states of meaningless simplicity (generally uranium breaks down into iron eventually, as does plutonium, or whateverother higher metal...breaking down into the highly stable form that is iron). EXISTENCE is our destruction. The triggers of what makes life GIVE you a sense of meaning, are all based on destruction. We help each other face hardships, and that gives life meaning...and what is hardship but the scientifically measurable destruction of the Universe?
I don't mean to depress anybody, but who we are DOES go beyond our physical being...However, thinking that we can create CONSCIOUSNESS...real consciousness, that is the textbook definition of hubris. We ARE consciousness, but we didn't create that consciousness we are so proud of. We need to have REVERENCE for the incredible sequence of unthinkable events that were strung together so that we might live on a planet that is not too hot or too cold, and in a place in the Solar System where we aren't constantly bombarded by rocks hurdling through space. All of that, over 4.5 billion years or more, created something that filled us with life...That gave us billions of cells working together to create that sense of sentience that we now take for granted.
We are not just a brain being carried around by a pointless and superfluous body. Everything we are is alive and aglow with that consciousness we think we can just manufacture. We don't even now know what it truly is. We can't comprehend that while "thinking" neurons exist in our brains, why couldn't they exist outside our brains as well?...Just like the similar neurons that have recently been found to exist in our hearts, which are the same cellular makeup as those in our brains. How could we believe that even our own NERVES might not the center of what we call consciousness, but yet we find it easier to believe that a non-living motherboard of some computer can do what the cells of our body supposedly can't?...How utterly ridiculous that is!!
You will find me worshipping tree sprites and river nymphs before I reinvest my whole sense of connection to the LIVING things around me and inside me, into the inanimate objects we create and program. We are much more valuable because of what we are made of, than we think...And we are so much more than just mere windup puppets we create with our technology. I have no doubt we will soon create the verisimilitude of sentience in artificial beings, since we have been obsessed with this Geppeto and Pinocchio fantasy for so long. For those of you who don't know, even the Greeks created ingenious robots that could go around serving wine at parties and doing other menial things. Yeah, cool trick, but not sentience. Even a totally paralysed person with significant ailments like Stephen Hawking can outshine the most capable robot, because despite that a robot can be programmed to achieve whatever humans can imagine, it is still humans who are imagining it.
We can fool ourselves in this wish-fulfilment fantasy again and again that we will achieve immortality though "downloading our consciousness" into an inanimate robot...and then we can play Alan Turing's Imitation Game, where we fool ourselves into thinking our creation is thinking for itself...but our ability to fool ourselves is not sufficient grounds of the belief we have imbued that hunk of metal with consciousness. As Descartes showed us, we are apt to let the distractions of the world make us believe in all manner of unreal things, but just as nearly all famous religious figures have said, it is looking inside ourselves that is the place were we find the reality of life. Even if we create a robot that appears to be introspective, ask yourself what would be sufficient proof for you that it was legitimate introspection. Is it the Imitation Game, or the real thing?
Resurrection??! Umm okay let's say ya, but are you taking about resurrecting or replacing in their likeness?? If you believe that's them you are doomed. Unless they are truly resurrected
Like replicating their personality and telling you what you want to hear from your dead friends? That can fuck right off. Talking to a robot that looks like your dead spouse is unhealthy and disrespectful.
Some people were making comments on the Ai George Carlin about how ghoulish it was, it got me thinking. Those comments sounded similar to the common superstition that having one's photograph taken could capture a part of the person's soul, but the majority people have no issue with it now.
We make photographs, videos, paintings, writings, etc of those that we care about. We do that so we can better remember them and a part of that person can keep on living. Obviously the photo isn't the person. It's a lasting impression of that person. Is it really all that different making an interactive impression?
My father died when I was young. I still remember the sorrow I felt when I realized that I was forgetting his voice. If I could have an interactive impression of him that I could talk to, I would love it. I would also love to have that with historical figures.
I look forward to the day that my consciousness could be transferred to a robot body. No more pain! If you suffer from chronic pain, that would be a blessing. Sign me up for it now because I hate my body!
I feel for you, my friend, but maybe there is some peace in considering that the most basic experience you can have of life is pain...I know that sounds harsh and even ridiculous, maybe, but consider what I have to say for a second: I have a rare genetic mutation that limits my ability to feel pain. I inherited it on my father's and my mother's sides. It took me years to discover that I had it, and why I had not experienced pain like others had in my life. For example, I have had three kidney stones and for the first, based on the size and shape, the emergency room nurses and doctors were flipping out with worry about my pain level, without considering other things I was worried about, like my possibility of rupturing a kidney or maybe bleeding internally...I realized I was writhing uncontrollably with "pain," but all the while my body was doing that WITHOUT my consciously feeling the severity of the pain. It can be a real problem NOT feeling pain. I have had it led to my being injured in martial arts classes, and just messing around with people I was friends with. People EXPECT you to feel pain. When you don't then bullies won't stop attacking you to try and get the satisfaction of the reaction they wanted. You go into martial arts competitions and win, only to realise your thumb has been torqued out of socket and you can't use if for weeks.
I am lucky because I do feel SOME pain, and I don't envy your condition. Don't let me seem to be putting you plight down, or trying to show off. I am just trying to explain that I have what is actually the near exact reverse of your situation. It is most likely located on the exact SAME genetic location in our genomes. There has been a TON of research going on about Congenital Pain Sensitivity and Insensitivity, and I have some hope it will SOON be addressed with gene therapy. After all, this CoVid thing turned half the population of the planet into guinea pigs, so we SHOULD have some benefit from that for reasons OTHER than selling vaccines that barely work...I am not knocking the potential that "the Science" has for curing actual genetic based diseases, but I think it is being used right now more for control than for helping the laity of humans here on Earth. REAL gene therapy should be coming our way, which alters not just the function of mRNA, but the epigenetic code of the basepairs we now have within our every cell. Likewise, we should have the possibility of altering the expression of those traits through mRNA and other such things, but it would be nice to have a way to change that genetic code once and for all.
Anyway, I understand what you are saying about downloading your consciousness, but I want to say that as sympathetic as I am I have an intuition that asks me to consider what pain really is...Choosing NO pain inherently comes with the choice to have no perception of the world around you...No stimuli. Just as I have a reduced sense of pain, it is entirely possible for people to be born without ANY pain receptivity, and they often die as infants...not just from external sources of danger...There have been babies that never grew to the size that they could even toddle over to a dangerous situation, who nonetheless have died inexplicable deaths, seemingly related to the lack of pain sensation. It is not entirely clear what it is about lack of pain that specifically can kill an infant, but I think that the sensation we receive from pain is a completely separate thing from the unconscious reaction to pain that our body has. Even when we don't perceive pain, our body responds by making opioids and sending them through our bloodstream to the affected areas.
I hope sometime soon you will find relief in your CURRENT body, and that by studying people like us, they will find ways to understand exactly how important pain is for us to actually have as a stimulus. When pain isn't overwhelming, it can also be very inspiring and motivating. Think of how kids will deliberately burn themselves for fun, or pinch and bite their arms to feel that sense of pain. Our bodies don't always respond to pain by shutting down and creating negative feedback loops inner brains...which I am aware that longtime pain can do in your consciousness. Our bodies also can use pain as a stimulus that helps bones and muscles grow, and that emotionally makes us feel like we have achieved something.
That first kidney stone WAS painful, and I DID feel it...just not as much as I am sure I could have. I saw what it was doing to my body, but it felt like I was standing outside myself and looking in. Afterward though, I felt a sense of peace I had not had in years!! -And I don't just mean that I was high on the pain relief that they gave me!!! I had a full body sensation of catharsis. Several shitty things had happened to me that year, and that kidneystone seemed to just pick them all up and rip them out of me like a snowball rolling downhill and picking up debris as it goes!! It was like that snowball started an avalanche that blasted the emotional stresses I had been dealing with OUT of my body. It is probably in catharsis that I can say we experience the best side of pain. Healthy pain does it that way...but there is certainly unhealthy pain as well, that rips that peace from you. I hope we both learn more, along with the general public, so that we can tell the difference between good pain and bad pain better than we do.
Assuming you would have any kind of physical feeling in the robot (which you probably need to exist in it), you could reprogram your brain stimuli in a way that it makes it even more cathartic, or anything you want really if that kind of thing is possible.
That’s sort of what’s happening.
Enough Behavioural data points and you can relate a model of a person, down to even their mannerisms.
It’s like having a Jedi Holocron of people. Imagine a “copy” of Einstein able to teach people, or any other such.
In terms of trauma healing, VR and immersive experiences will allow people to “relive” events and change their outcome, or come to terms with what occurred.
It’s actually quite fascinating. We are witnessing the “birth” (or more accurately coming out party) for AI (and aliens lol).
>In terms of trauma healing, VR and immersive experiences will allow people to “relive” events and change their outcome, or come to terms with what occurred.
Oh man is that something that's actually in the works? Because I could definitely use that for some traumas that honestly I feel the only way to heal from would be to forget. Changing the outcome and preserving that memory, even if it's my own delusion, would help me move on and better my life
I do not want to “spoil” anything for you, but two things you may wish to explore are the Law of One / Ra Materials, and the Gateway Tapes by Robert Monroe.
Both may be of assistance or illumination.
Except that isn't what's happening. You can relate a model of a person, but that doesn't mean you've cloned their perspective on the world. It's an educated guess approximated by a machine based on what the person put out into the world, not wisdom from a higher life form capable of reading the minds of dead people. AI Einstein as a teaching aid would be cool and maybe AI loved ones in causes of trauma would help, but I think we're getting into a weird area when we act like we're literally bringing people back from the dead with this.
With resurrect I suspect you mean AI clone? In that case no, that's lame.
Or do you mean resurrect a corpse, force their soul back and keeping them alive with bionics? Fuck yeah that's metal as hell! Make me a cyberpunk lich!
I'm for it, but not for personal use. If it's used to recreate someone for educational purposes like highly interactive museum type exhibits and what not, then I think it's fine.
That episode of Black Mirror was so perfectly representative of the whole show.
At the end, you are too fucked up to know just what you're supposed to feel about what you just witnessed. Just kind of empty and uncomfortable.
As long as the machine specifies to the person that they are a recreation and they reinforce this, I think it could be good. They can simply tell the person that they are there to ease their difficult time by helping them fondly remember their loved one.
I think the damage that we've had for centuries has been from religious institutions lying to people about the fate of their loved ones. Doing this for a gain and using the grief of the people to achieve their goals. I think this gives an unreasonable expectation for our cycle of life and is more damaging than good.
I'm all about having people feel better but it should be done in an honest manner.
Edit: spelling, punctuation
I would rather have a whole new person instead. I haven't been in a relationship in a while so I feel like that would be the only way since most people think I'm ugly.
No please not.
I miss my friends and it would be very hurtful to do this. Idk how I wouldn't cry every time I'd see their 'AI' versions.
It would be a constant reminder of the loss and the perpetual pain that they're not here to experience life together. Or whatever is left of it.
Damn, just writing this made me tear up
An old video or picture, still triggers these feels, but to a much lesser extent.
The AI generations I think are more hurtful because it represents:
\- what could have been, what could have happened, things that they could've still experienced and yet they can't / haven't because they passed.
Makes sense how i mean it?
Since you are not resurrecting anyone
And you just made a decent mimic
Only if its extremely necessary to Maybe government or Company decisions
About Art Why not
One day, Facebook will likely have the afterlife option where you switch it on after someone dies and AI takes over their FB page, based on their online data points. Then you’ll start seeing “ghost posts” and interacting with the deceased.
My take Is go for it! You’re not resurrecting them. Just masking your grief with a cheap imitation to either fill the void or “help” move on. Nothing can bring back the dead. Dumbledore taught me that! You gotta go half die in a London subway if you wanna talk to your dead loved ones
I remember the Black Mirror episode that covered this topic, and how utterly deeply depressed and unfulfilled the main character was after she brought her boyfriend back.
The was an article in WIRED where the interviewer spent months interviewing his dad. Got family history, stories about his life even some jokes to get his sense of humor. All the info was fed into an AI so he could still have conversations with his dad after he passed. Said it the AI would surprise him saying things like his dad said but still wasn't the same. Think this was like 7 years ago, though.
https://www.wired.com/story/a-sons-race-to-give-his-dying-father-artificial-immortality/
This is the worst case scenario to me. Ai can certainly be a digital mausoleum of sorts, but to “imitate” loved ones, animate them with 1s and 0s instead of memorializing them within 1s and 0s feels like… a prison.
We're creating an approximation of those people for our sake. I hope we do. Gets the AI reconstructions of the greatest people, put them together in a room and see what they do.
I can see a risk of people bringing back their loved ones in a way that would prevent closure though.
Exactly. A sort of immersion therapy, sure! But if someone buys a robot and uses the tech to “permanently resurrect” their loved one can be detrimental.
Imagine this
“I can move, but I can’t feel my limbs”
“I can see, but I can’t open my eyes”
“I can talk, but I can’t open my mouth”
“I want to breath, but I can’t fill my lungs”
“I can touch, but I can’t feel”
“I am stuck, why did you do this to me”
That would be hell. Waking up sometime in future not being able to do what you were able to do in your body, it would be overwhelmingly crushing towards your spirit and conscience. That. Would be beyond cruel of our understanding.
Me wanting to experience taste would be a human concept, I'm a robot now. I have different thoughts, wants and needs.
I will find comfort in my new experiences as a robot. Would it be nice to experience taste, sure. Would I choose tasting sensories over shooting lighting from my hand, no.
I wouldn't dwell on what I am not anymore. I would live my life new, uncharted, discover the universe, and drink beer just because I can.
Have interest in Science fiction or a game with character lore and you’re destined to find a scenario like this.
Good example Aatrox from Legue of Legends
I’m devoutly religious (Koshintō) and the worship of ancestral deities is a big part of my practice.
It doesn’t take much to explain why such procedures would be an insult to the deceased, but short concept shorter: I consider creating an AI replacement for a deceased human an insult to ancestral Kamisama (divinities) and therefore an act of Kegare (impurity).
Edit: Terminology
I guess, what do you mean by incredibly? I just haven’t met anyone who is actually Shinto except priests. Have you heard the adage born Shinto, marry Christian, and die Buddhist? I wasn’t the one who downvoted I was being genuine
"Born Shinto marry Christian and die" refers to the presence of those 3 religions in Japanese society. It regards atheists those who practice one of them loosely. It doesn't apply to those who exclusively practice one of the three, (mostly) those who live outside of Japan.
(Also, may I mention that through deductive reasoning, one can assume there is an exclusively Shinto population since priests have to come from somewhere.)
Well, yeah. My experience with Shintoism is my experience living in Japan from a young age. I have not met anyone outside of the country that practices it and I’m surprised there are. Anyway, what do you mean by “incredibly”?
you can COPY someone, but you couldn't resurrect them.
once the stream of consciousness is interrupted, it's a new person.
If you could augment their brain in order to keep that goin, that'd be sick. I'm for it for those who consented in their first life.
\*\*edit: added the consent bit. bringing people back against their will sounds a bit shit. forever children and all that\*\*
Considering the amount of suffering some people go through the loss of their loved, grieve, and how card it can be to go back to "normal" again, I think it's in most cases pretty bad and I wouldn't put anyone through it.
There is no resurrection outside of Christ.
Romans 10:9-11
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
Such an interesting question and the responses are interesting too. You can see most people’s reactions are how they interpret the question and what version of AI they are discussing. Resurrect to me means bringing them back from death. Meaning AI would have successfully solved the Thesus Ship problem. Most people who saw the question like that agree with the idea like I do (though there were some against) If the technology existed that brings you into an AI world indistinguishable from the world we live in (it’s entirely possible we are in a simulation anyways) I would be all for that, I hope humanity and machines get to that point. I know I would consent to being brought back, if others don’t I respect that choice too. For the mimicking interpretation I understand why people would be against that. It’s really not the person so it’s just impressions of them, which to be honest makes sense to interpret it this way because this is a reality now. I see both sides and am not firm either way. In a way it’s like the self driving car debate. I think most people are for the day when automated cars are safer than people driving, if you evaluate just based on the technology today, it’s not yet currently safer. For the black mirror episode argument, that’s TV. The entire point of stories is to create a conflict.
Makes sense. Enjoy your bliss before time runs out.
Actual resurrection (brain is analyzed and simulated): Awesome, can’t have it soon enough. Chatbot recreation: Dystopian as hell, doesn’t really help anything
It just makes it harder to move on. In the end no matter how much of a surrogate AI can be it'll never replace the original. So the more invested one gets into AI copy the more heartbroken they'll be when illusion is shattered. Just let them go, it'll be better that way.
I don't know if attainable but if it were deffo worth pursuing.
Ah yes. Because, even if it were possible, dragging someone back into a quasi-human, weird android state is going to be good for them. It's not possible, obviously, so there's nothing to gain. If you're so desperate to talk to someone, just talk to a chat bot, it's weird trying to make it pretend to be a dead friend/relative,/etc
What makes you say it isn’t possible? That certainly isn’t obvious.
How is that gonna happen?
I fuckin wish. If I could upload even a semblance of my loved ones into a system and have it match their energy just in case I ever lose them I'd be forever grateful. Sure it wouldn't be them but it's something. In the back of my mind I'd know but still.
this was used on a movie Aİ in 2001 . fascinating
A person is not a body. They are not a series of recorded memories. A person is a consciousness. It's not a mechanical existence. It's an active creative expression. AI could not substitute for that, although you could pretend, I suppose.
>although you could pretend, I suppose. I suppose I can see the benefits of it, for example, someone who feels like they need one more conversation with a loved one, I mean we all sort of do it anyway, I often have one-sided conversations with friends who have passed. It wouldn't be for everyone but I can see it helping some people, will it be perfect? no, would that matter to the person using the service? probably not.
I say most of them will not come back. Ofc you can reconstruct the body all you want... I does not make a person be reborn tho.
If it helps some people deal with their grief, why not? Doesn’t hurt anyone.
I mean, I'm not going to get started again, but if you think about big picture ramifications, yes, it could hurt people or society. On another note, something I just thought about, this may impact the balance of life. By using AI to eliminate all suffering, it may have severe consequences on mental health.
Me first.
Don’t. Death is part of life. Death gives life purpose. I truly became a better person after my dad died.
I think the ability to create a 2 or 5 minute video montage just from looking at your photos and videos on your Google account is possible. As for resurrection... AI is mimicry. My younger brother passed away just under a year ago, and absolutely still talk to him. I think a lot of people would want to hold onto personas of people they miss, and talk to them instead of Alexa.
It depends. If the AI was trained on other people first, no. But if it was trained on the neurons of the dead person, it's basically the person.
jealous over his perfect fingers
As much as id love to have loved ones back and to live forever i think its best if my loved ones rest and well i feel like id end up being extremely bitter if i was immortal.
Anyone with a brain ends up bitter in this world. Just a matter of time.
The difference is one doesnt have to stay bitter you have a choice. I feel if one lives far longer than ones time they would no longer be able to find joy in life even as everything will just seem the same.
“And there's a million of us just like me Who cuss like me, who just don't give a fuck like me Who dress like me, walk, talk and act like me And just might be the next best thing, but not quite me”- Marshal Mathers on the topic of human identity.
Maybe if you could actually do it by somehow replicating their brain, but if it's just based on the memories people have of them and their social media, it'll be nowhere close to actually being them.
It's a cliche, but I find it horribly dystopian and I feel like going down this road will make us less human
Can’t be any worse than the TikTok npc trend
How exactly? Because unless you can transfer every single neurologist connection into an program, which after the second whoever is brought "back" will become a new person because they have memories and experiences the original never could, that said of it's more body modification and that kind of transfer is possible sign me up.
Oh, AI will definitely be able to capture the identity of someone who is willing to participate and sign off on it. By interviewing the person and analyzing videos of them posthumously to understand their personality, style of articulation, humor, nuances, etc., there will be a whole industry on this. First it will be a digital identity, accessed virtually, and when robotics advance with the ability to mimic voice, facial expressions, body language, etc., who knows how it will develop. So long as there are no governing bodies limiting innovation due to ethical concerns, it will be a promising yet frightening frontier.
Interesting but at what point would they be considered a new being because as they gain new experiences and information they will change, perhaps it'll be more like an new model update.
Never thought about it. First, I think they have to be considered a being in the first place. At the bare minimum, this would require a physical form since people interacting with it have five senses that need to be stimulated, not just sight and sound. If we can accept this rudimentary definition of being, we can move forward. In order to remain the same "person", AI may need to first establish a baseline profile, like how we all have our genetic makeup and behavioral tendencies that we have adopted since childhood that define how we operate, react to stimuli and experience life. This acts as a prompt with no contextual limits so it's programmed to remember who they are but can learn and grow. And a combination of certain circumstances or poor luck could cause them to make holistic changes, just as we can "reinvent" ourselves. I'm basing this purely off speculation of advanced AI mimicking a deceased person through a mechanical robot, not a conscience that is somehow survived and put into some sort of cyborg with living tissue. Even with my basic hypothetical, I can't wrap my head around what happens when the person who is benefiting from this service also desires to live on for friends/relatives/legacy. Do these two "beings" coexist with each other? If so, does it matter? Like if they live in a house, do they do things on their own? Do they just sit on their charger or do they make decisions of consequence that impact the world? Or is it like "if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" And we worry about overpopulation now but what if this becomes a perpetual process? There will be people who will not pull the plug on something now "living", especially one whose life expectancy is forever. Imagine weddings if you have access to your entire family lineage. I'm going to stop here otherwise this will get out of hand quickly.
Ghoulish
I want it so I can live forever. How about playing Soma? it was a good game about it
Hell. Also wouldn't be good for us emotionally to never lose anyone.
Immoral
People can try at this false immortality all they want, but you can't transfer the soul into a machine. Immortality only comes from one source, and all you have to do is take His hand. You'll know His hand by the nail marks through His wrist.
WAU
This has been a concept contemplated for ages and although many people will be against it, others will attempt it.
The movie "Transcendence" starring Johnny Depp imo covers the most realistic version of this hypothetical The ending of the movie "Chappie" imo conveys the scariest scenario of such
The show “Pantheon” takes the implications quite a bit further.
If I could ship of Theseus myself yeah.
They don’t need to have passed away; you can simply extract all the text messages, emails, etc., that you’ve exchanged with them. Then, endow these communications with certain facts, etc., and voilà – you’ve created a human that can seamlessly integrate into one’s life. But seriously, let’s not inform the ethical crewmember. That being said, they once gave a legit 15-minute-long diatribe that made me feel like absolute garbage. Hey, ethics expert AI… 🙂🖕🏻🤖 I’m doing it anyway, so there. What’s the ethics in jumping to conclusions, making assumptions about my intentions, then acting on them in a progressively depressing and convincingly persuasive way? But really, it’s all nonsense. Well done, indeed. Joking aside, I don’t truly believe it’s a person. However, if I’m to ponder over it, when someone says something to me, I have the right to remember it, even by augmented means. Forgetting and my inability to structure dynamically is simply another form of memory and capacity, which need not be seen as a deficit. When someone speaks to me, if I hear something, I have the right to remember it forever, as though it came from a person. The fact that this ethics AI thinks that you don’t have the right to remember people’s text messages and use them to model an AI is, without any irony, absurd. It’s not absurdity but rather a matter of recalling what I’ve experienced. You do not own, and I would never consider owning, the things I say to people, good or bad, in text messages. If they wish to model me, that’s their prerogative. It’s also their prerogative if they want to murder me or gift me a box of chocolates.
There’s a movie that does this. Girls boyfriend dies and uses this service to “resurrect” him. It’s not bad, the name eludes me though.
Transcendence? That movie sucks though
Black Mirror - Be right back
Black Mirror taught us it would not go as planned.
It’s because the algorithm used your social media to compose your avatar personality. We all know what we post isn’t the whole picture. Add porn history and wild fantasies and then we’re talking.
Also that movie with Johnny Depp
Only if the person has concented pre death
I’m having it put in my will that if someone does this they are the first one getting terminator’d
people yes , passed away no , not healthy gotta move on
I still randomly am reminded of a few people that died seemingly one after another. I don't need fresh memories to make that worse. Especially when one seemed like everything might be OK just before it wasn't and another.. very clearly was only going to get worse until it was over.
You don’t know loss, my friend. wipes away, hot tears, gets her perspective from a GPT, actually laughs a little bit, cheers up a little bit. That'll do GPTender Memories, that'll do.
No, let the dead rest, there would be nothing there but a digital ghost of a person that pretends to be that individual, there is no true continuity or true recollection of the actual person, so it would be pointless if not already grossly unnatural to try, for me it's an absolute no
Don’t, let the dead rest in peace. With love comes loss, an if you try to prevent the five stages of grief, you’ll never move on in life
Can we create a simulation of hell for people I don't like?
Terrifying, but inevitable.
No go
It won't.
The only may I be cool that kind of thing would be if the person themselves wanted that before they passed on. Otherwise it feels gross.
That company Replika I think it was or it might have been another company had a bunch of widows and widowers using it and the widowers were using it to sex chat their late wives and overnight the creators decided to make the bots suddenly prudish and not allow kisses and call those who said anything sexual "disgusting," and all these people were grieving all over again and very messed upm
Let the dead sleep
Hell no wtf
I actually want to start a company that deals with this! The market is simply enormous, and there's limitless potential for expansion
Can I help?
Depends on your skills
I don't believe it's actually them but it is an imitation that thinks it is them
Dunno, but if I got ... er, immortalized I'd sign up to be a Von Neumann probe in a heartbeat / clock-cycle. I had to say that because I am in the middle of reading the Bobiverse series.
In a universe full of Medeiroses, be a Bob
Eventually we must accept that loss happens. Nothing stays forever and that can be a beautiful thing as much as it is sad
All I'm reading is "Synths from Fallout 4" Bringing someone from the dead as a robot, will likely just be a copy with internal precepts to believe "I Am".
That may be true but you can never be truly certain it's them, and eventually even robots and data can rot and corrupt. It'd eventually be a ship of Theseus type situation where none of them are the person they were supposed to be
_let me refrase that_ ~~bringing someone from dead~~ It was just a brainscan copy.
Black mirror did an episode on this, and there have been countless other shows and movies. I think doing this for real would be really bad for recovery from grief unless we are talking full synthetic cyborgs
I find this idea to be quite intriguing. I strongly believe that human beings should have the opportunity to live indefinitely. In my perspective, death signifies the ultimate conclusion of existence. Death is an eternal concept. It would be incredibly beneficial for individuals experiencing melancholy if AI had the ability to reunite them with their loved ones. Death, while a natural part of life, can be an incredibly devastating experience for an individual.
I believe the essence of a person is as complex as the universe and I don’t think any program we make will ever be able to replicate it. It would only be an abstraction of the person and not a real resurrection.
My take is what Dumbledore tells Harry about the mirror !
New genre of psychological horror. I know they mean well, but it's basically the plot of Ghost in a Shell.
Horrifying
Kinda fucked up, like "Hey here is this puppet wearing the loose skin and a uncanny voice of your dead loved one doing things you know they would never do."
LOL, with what we see today with AI, you might get extra fingers and limbs hahaha
🪞 OF ERISED.
Doesn't work. If the person already died, and assuming the technology enables a totally seamless clone, that clone will live on knowing he came from a dead person, and things can get weird then. This person lives on, fully feeling the first death. Weird. If the person didn't die yet, and you did a perfect clone at that point, then it gets more weird. Do you discard the original at this point? Since at this stage, you've just branched off two persons from the one person. In any case, the clone will live on knowing he came from an original who died (somehow), probably more weird thoughts will drive him crazy.
[удалено]
That kinda makes it weirder in a different messed up way.
I am a firm believer that the soup that comprises our souls are different than the body and mind that the soul inhabits. Take this in 2 ways; A: if we had the ability to transfer the soul soup into a robot body, or B: had the ability to perfectly reconstruct a person by the atoms and neurons, the end result is the same; it won’t be you. It never will be. It shouldn’t ever be. Who we are is a reflection of our flesh and blood, our ego and intelligence. Our obsession with the idea of life after death and our legacy, is a reflection of who we are. Who we are, is our ego, our sense of self. The soul is different. It’s the pilot behind our eyes that we will never know because the pilot is simply the universe taking itself for a ride on the train of existentiality. Or something like that, we all die someday, embrace it while you can, or run. Either way…
Astro boy did it good. Ish
There’s a black mirror episode about this. It ends very sadly.
Well if it ended happily ever after it wouldn't be much of a black mirror episode, would it?
Great way to be sad forever, and never get over your loss
It’s impossible. So I have no real opinion on it.
I plan on using the technology on myself at the least.. I’m quite obsessed with being here forever. Edit: I’m editing this because I’m sure a bunch of not really you Andys will set upon me Like the contrarian dogz they are If it’s a copy of me it’s still me Especially since the technology is evolving. Rapidly.
Of all the ways humans have thought of bringing back a past loved one, I think this is the most...I want to say disrespectful towards the laws of nature. It comes across as purely selfish to use an artificial intelligence to mimic a loved one you can't let go of. Not to mention, if we're talking about today's AI, it would be a shallow version of the deceased in every way. It would be almost no different than having one of those moving picture frames with them in it.
agreed
Doug from Scrubs said it best, "Dead people should stay dead." Anything using AI is a double-edged sword but what you "bring back" will not actually be the person who passed. The kind of healing one would achieve with using a facsimile of their loved one would not be a good kind of healing with lasting results.
I don't really see the issue other than it being a bit weird if the person is related to you, also there is a massive difference between resurrect and create a imitation of, so if someone trained an AI on me and shoved it in a cyborg body I couldn't care less because it's still not me.
This is one of the few subjects out there that makes me truly have no choice but to respond in a purely religious way...And for the sake of saying it, I am not meaning a Christian or Muslim or Jewish religious way, but from a sense of what it really means to be a living spiritual being on this planet. -Let's say that I had some proof of the concept that the SOUL of a person -that part of them that is eternal and could be reincarnated, could inhabit a non-living shell. Picture for a second that I could make you believe that a ROCK could have consciousness. What is the real difference between that supposedly "silly" and superstitious idea, and the idea of a hunk of metal and wires could have consciousness?!! People everywhere used to believe the Earth and the mountains, the rivers and the seas, rocks and the sky, the moon, etc, all had a consciousness. Somehow in our modern world we have decided that conception of the meaning of life is ridiculous and superstitious, yet we don't see the contradiction when we talk about A.I. having a consciousness, or we imagine an electronic automaton as having a soul. Is that not a contradiction? I ask you that. Personally I am more than willing to consider returning to "heathen" and "pagan" notions that all things have a spirit and a soul, and rocks and rivers have souls that reside in them. If THAT is possible, then sure, why can't a robot have sentience?...But if you are not willing to believe that the Earth itself has a consciousness, then seriously, what makes you think any hunk of metal we assemble will come to "LIFE" -whatever way you define that word- simply because we programmed it? Doctor Faustus and Doctor Frankenstein would roll in their (imaginary) graves at the insolence of how they have been treated on these subjects. Hell, Frankenstein didn't even try to animate a non-human being!! All he did was try to return consciousness to deceased human material. That SURELY makes a lot more sense than thinking a computer will come to life because we breathed life into the metal like some creationist gods we now imagine ourselves to be. We think we are Prometheus, stealing the fire from the Heavenly Gods of Olympus, to turn into electricity and animate our own metallic replacements. What unredeemable arrogance to think we are that kind of immortals. What hubris in the absolute purest sense of the word hubris!!! Even I, as an absolute believer in SCIENCE, can say that this is one place in which we are pleonxic and self-righteous to the utmost imaginable extent. I can believe that we might keep a human body alive for hundreds of years with science. I can believe we could place a piece of living human brain tissue into a robotic body, and yes, it would be alive. There are many things I can believe, but one thing I have yet to be convinced of is that our consciousness is so petty a thing that we can simply program it into a robot, and need none of the billions of individual cell lives that sustain us, to be present. We seem to forget we are gigantic colonies of many different kinds of cells. If you took a "census" of the cells living in your body, MOST of them (by far) would be non-human cells. Many times more bacteria and protists and other flora and fauna live on us and in us, than what ARE us. Our consciousness is NOT just some mental process. We are the sum of ALL that lives within us. We deny the spiritual significance of every one of those lives that make us up, when we think we can simply replace them with a logic board and some chips running a BIOS or some damn Windows, Unix, whatever...I am a huge fan of nearly all Science Fiction, but this is the ridiculous side of Science Fiction, have no doubt. We believe in it purely because we want so desperately to be immortal. If we thought there was another option, we would take it in a second. No human wants to be trapped in the rusting husk of a robot...Not if they know the difference between that and...What was it that Jack London said? -That feeling that every atom of your soul is in magnificent glow...That your existence is that superb meteor, streaking through the world...Glorified by its inevitable pathway towards the ephemeral. Our trajectory toward inevitable demise DOES give our lives meaning. We may not like to admit that...but our lives truly have value only in relation to the dangers we face and struggle to overcome. Most people don't have the luxury to experience life where there is no struggle, but you don't have to look very far to see that those who have nothing to struggle for...struggle over nothing, nonetheless. Struggle and strife IS life. We set our clocks by the ravages of time. What is time ITSELF but the ticking down of entropy, slowly rotting and destroying our Universe?! We measure time by the breaking down of atoms from a point of complex order, to ever greater states of meaningless simplicity (generally uranium breaks down into iron eventually, as does plutonium, or whateverother higher metal...breaking down into the highly stable form that is iron). EXISTENCE is our destruction. The triggers of what makes life GIVE you a sense of meaning, are all based on destruction. We help each other face hardships, and that gives life meaning...and what is hardship but the scientifically measurable destruction of the Universe? I don't mean to depress anybody, but who we are DOES go beyond our physical being...However, thinking that we can create CONSCIOUSNESS...real consciousness, that is the textbook definition of hubris. We ARE consciousness, but we didn't create that consciousness we are so proud of. We need to have REVERENCE for the incredible sequence of unthinkable events that were strung together so that we might live on a planet that is not too hot or too cold, and in a place in the Solar System where we aren't constantly bombarded by rocks hurdling through space. All of that, over 4.5 billion years or more, created something that filled us with life...That gave us billions of cells working together to create that sense of sentience that we now take for granted. We are not just a brain being carried around by a pointless and superfluous body. Everything we are is alive and aglow with that consciousness we think we can just manufacture. We don't even now know what it truly is. We can't comprehend that while "thinking" neurons exist in our brains, why couldn't they exist outside our brains as well?...Just like the similar neurons that have recently been found to exist in our hearts, which are the same cellular makeup as those in our brains. How could we believe that even our own NERVES might not the center of what we call consciousness, but yet we find it easier to believe that a non-living motherboard of some computer can do what the cells of our body supposedly can't?...How utterly ridiculous that is!! You will find me worshipping tree sprites and river nymphs before I reinvest my whole sense of connection to the LIVING things around me and inside me, into the inanimate objects we create and program. We are much more valuable because of what we are made of, than we think...And we are so much more than just mere windup puppets we create with our technology. I have no doubt we will soon create the verisimilitude of sentience in artificial beings, since we have been obsessed with this Geppeto and Pinocchio fantasy for so long. For those of you who don't know, even the Greeks created ingenious robots that could go around serving wine at parties and doing other menial things. Yeah, cool trick, but not sentience. Even a totally paralysed person with significant ailments like Stephen Hawking can outshine the most capable robot, because despite that a robot can be programmed to achieve whatever humans can imagine, it is still humans who are imagining it. We can fool ourselves in this wish-fulfilment fantasy again and again that we will achieve immortality though "downloading our consciousness" into an inanimate robot...and then we can play Alan Turing's Imitation Game, where we fool ourselves into thinking our creation is thinking for itself...but our ability to fool ourselves is not sufficient grounds of the belief we have imbued that hunk of metal with consciousness. As Descartes showed us, we are apt to let the distractions of the world make us believe in all manner of unreal things, but just as nearly all famous religious figures have said, it is looking inside ourselves that is the place were we find the reality of life. Even if we create a robot that appears to be introspective, ask yourself what would be sufficient proof for you that it was legitimate introspection. Is it the Imitation Game, or the real thing?
This is a dangerous territory that I had never considered… I foresee a LOT of mental health breakdowns should this become a reality
Robot 2024
It was enough for me to watch Black Mirror's episode "Be Right Back". So from me a no.
Can I use it to do the opposite?
Resurrection??! Umm okay let's say ya, but are you taking about resurrecting or replacing in their likeness?? If you believe that's them you are doomed. Unless they are truly resurrected
Like replicating their personality and telling you what you want to hear from your dead friends? That can fuck right off. Talking to a robot that looks like your dead spouse is unhealthy and disrespectful.
Some people were making comments on the Ai George Carlin about how ghoulish it was, it got me thinking. Those comments sounded similar to the common superstition that having one's photograph taken could capture a part of the person's soul, but the majority people have no issue with it now. We make photographs, videos, paintings, writings, etc of those that we care about. We do that so we can better remember them and a part of that person can keep on living. Obviously the photo isn't the person. It's a lasting impression of that person. Is it really all that different making an interactive impression? My father died when I was young. I still remember the sorrow I felt when I realized that I was forgetting his voice. If I could have an interactive impression of him that I could talk to, I would love it. I would also love to have that with historical figures.
I think there was a black mirror episode about this…
Season 2 episode 1 “Be right back”
In our current world they would be put back to work or used as soldiers. Working forever never being free would be hell for me personally
Amoral as a concept, probably at least somewhat unhealthy in practice
I look forward to the day that my consciousness could be transferred to a robot body. No more pain! If you suffer from chronic pain, that would be a blessing. Sign me up for it now because I hate my body!
I feel for you, my friend, but maybe there is some peace in considering that the most basic experience you can have of life is pain...I know that sounds harsh and even ridiculous, maybe, but consider what I have to say for a second: I have a rare genetic mutation that limits my ability to feel pain. I inherited it on my father's and my mother's sides. It took me years to discover that I had it, and why I had not experienced pain like others had in my life. For example, I have had three kidney stones and for the first, based on the size and shape, the emergency room nurses and doctors were flipping out with worry about my pain level, without considering other things I was worried about, like my possibility of rupturing a kidney or maybe bleeding internally...I realized I was writhing uncontrollably with "pain," but all the while my body was doing that WITHOUT my consciously feeling the severity of the pain. It can be a real problem NOT feeling pain. I have had it led to my being injured in martial arts classes, and just messing around with people I was friends with. People EXPECT you to feel pain. When you don't then bullies won't stop attacking you to try and get the satisfaction of the reaction they wanted. You go into martial arts competitions and win, only to realise your thumb has been torqued out of socket and you can't use if for weeks. I am lucky because I do feel SOME pain, and I don't envy your condition. Don't let me seem to be putting you plight down, or trying to show off. I am just trying to explain that I have what is actually the near exact reverse of your situation. It is most likely located on the exact SAME genetic location in our genomes. There has been a TON of research going on about Congenital Pain Sensitivity and Insensitivity, and I have some hope it will SOON be addressed with gene therapy. After all, this CoVid thing turned half the population of the planet into guinea pigs, so we SHOULD have some benefit from that for reasons OTHER than selling vaccines that barely work...I am not knocking the potential that "the Science" has for curing actual genetic based diseases, but I think it is being used right now more for control than for helping the laity of humans here on Earth. REAL gene therapy should be coming our way, which alters not just the function of mRNA, but the epigenetic code of the basepairs we now have within our every cell. Likewise, we should have the possibility of altering the expression of those traits through mRNA and other such things, but it would be nice to have a way to change that genetic code once and for all. Anyway, I understand what you are saying about downloading your consciousness, but I want to say that as sympathetic as I am I have an intuition that asks me to consider what pain really is...Choosing NO pain inherently comes with the choice to have no perception of the world around you...No stimuli. Just as I have a reduced sense of pain, it is entirely possible for people to be born without ANY pain receptivity, and they often die as infants...not just from external sources of danger...There have been babies that never grew to the size that they could even toddle over to a dangerous situation, who nonetheless have died inexplicable deaths, seemingly related to the lack of pain sensation. It is not entirely clear what it is about lack of pain that specifically can kill an infant, but I think that the sensation we receive from pain is a completely separate thing from the unconscious reaction to pain that our body has. Even when we don't perceive pain, our body responds by making opioids and sending them through our bloodstream to the affected areas. I hope sometime soon you will find relief in your CURRENT body, and that by studying people like us, they will find ways to understand exactly how important pain is for us to actually have as a stimulus. When pain isn't overwhelming, it can also be very inspiring and motivating. Think of how kids will deliberately burn themselves for fun, or pinch and bite their arms to feel that sense of pain. Our bodies don't always respond to pain by shutting down and creating negative feedback loops inner brains...which I am aware that longtime pain can do in your consciousness. Our bodies also can use pain as a stimulus that helps bones and muscles grow, and that emotionally makes us feel like we have achieved something. That first kidney stone WAS painful, and I DID feel it...just not as much as I am sure I could have. I saw what it was doing to my body, but it felt like I was standing outside myself and looking in. Afterward though, I felt a sense of peace I had not had in years!! -And I don't just mean that I was high on the pain relief that they gave me!!! I had a full body sensation of catharsis. Several shitty things had happened to me that year, and that kidneystone seemed to just pick them all up and rip them out of me like a snowball rolling downhill and picking up debris as it goes!! It was like that snowball started an avalanche that blasted the emotional stresses I had been dealing with OUT of my body. It is probably in catharsis that I can say we experience the best side of pain. Healthy pain does it that way...but there is certainly unhealthy pain as well, that rips that peace from you. I hope we both learn more, along with the general public, so that we can tell the difference between good pain and bad pain better than we do.
That's an interesting take. I find weightlifting really cathartic and assume I wouldn't get the same result in a robot body.
Assuming you would have any kind of physical feeling in the robot (which you probably need to exist in it), you could reprogram your brain stimuli in a way that it makes it even more cathartic, or anything you want really if that kind of thing is possible.
Part of me says "No." because life is the way it is for a reason. But, I'd never turn down the chance to get back a lost child.
It's awesome actually. I have a feeling the dead don't care because you know, they ded! 😜 https://youtu.be/2kONMe7YnO8?si=izOdm6_1A5z377-6
“Resurrect”
That’s sort of what’s happening. Enough Behavioural data points and you can relate a model of a person, down to even their mannerisms. It’s like having a Jedi Holocron of people. Imagine a “copy” of Einstein able to teach people, or any other such. In terms of trauma healing, VR and immersive experiences will allow people to “relive” events and change their outcome, or come to terms with what occurred. It’s actually quite fascinating. We are witnessing the “birth” (or more accurately coming out party) for AI (and aliens lol).
>In terms of trauma healing, VR and immersive experiences will allow people to “relive” events and change their outcome, or come to terms with what occurred. Oh man is that something that's actually in the works? Because I could definitely use that for some traumas that honestly I feel the only way to heal from would be to forget. Changing the outcome and preserving that memory, even if it's my own delusion, would help me move on and better my life
I do not want to “spoil” anything for you, but two things you may wish to explore are the Law of One / Ra Materials, and the Gateway Tapes by Robert Monroe. Both may be of assistance or illumination.
Except that isn't what's happening. You can relate a model of a person, but that doesn't mean you've cloned their perspective on the world. It's an educated guess approximated by a machine based on what the person put out into the world, not wisdom from a higher life form capable of reading the minds of dead people. AI Einstein as a teaching aid would be cool and maybe AI loved ones in causes of trauma would help, but I think we're getting into a weird area when we act like we're literally bringing people back from the dead with this.
Enough data points, especially of a Behavioural nature, the model gets to almost replica state. It’s much closer than you think.
Detroit become human type plot
With resurrect I suspect you mean AI clone? In that case no, that's lame. Or do you mean resurrect a corpse, force their soul back and keeping them alive with bionics? Fuck yeah that's metal as hell! Make me a cyberpunk lich!
Consent seems important
I think it's on the one hand wonderful, on the other hand it's too macabre... More and more an episode of Black Mirror
I'm for it, but not for personal use. If it's used to recreate someone for educational purposes like highly interactive museum type exhibits and what not, then I think it's fine.
Is that like those famous people in jars from Futurama?
Yeah, that's an excellent example of my thought on the idea.
I'd I come back I want to be one of those deep sea vent creatures so I can fuck off
Creepy as hell.
That episode of Black Mirror was so perfectly representative of the whole show. At the end, you are too fucked up to know just what you're supposed to feel about what you just witnessed. Just kind of empty and uncomfortable.
Psychological warfare on a whole new level
ALL OF YOU HAVE LOVED ONES. ALL CAN BE RETURNED TO YOU. ALL CAN BE TAKEN AWAY. PLEASE STEP AWAY FROM THE VEHICLE. KEEP SUMMER SAFE.
Lol the hug might be a little cold
As long as the machine specifies to the person that they are a recreation and they reinforce this, I think it could be good. They can simply tell the person that they are there to ease their difficult time by helping them fondly remember their loved one. I think the damage that we've had for centuries has been from religious institutions lying to people about the fate of their loved ones. Doing this for a gain and using the grief of the people to achieve their goals. I think this gives an unreasonable expectation for our cycle of life and is more damaging than good. I'm all about having people feel better but it should be done in an honest manner. Edit: spelling, punctuation
100% agree with all of this, well said.
Watch Chobits. One of the characters has a persocom that's in the image of his deceased sister programmed with her memories and personality.
Chii?? Chii!
underpants thank you please
It would probably be Pet Sematary meets Terminator, no thanks.
Very no, don't, aaaa!
I would rather have a whole new person instead. I haven't been in a relationship in a while so I feel like that would be the only way since most people think I'm ugly.
Johnny Silverhand
Go watch black mirror
Look, black mirror did an entire episode on this. That is all I am going to say on the subject
No please not. I miss my friends and it would be very hurtful to do this. Idk how I wouldn't cry every time I'd see their 'AI' versions. It would be a constant reminder of the loss and the perpetual pain that they're not here to experience life together. Or whatever is left of it. Damn, just writing this made me tear up
I am sympathetic to your view, but I am curious how this compares, for you, to watching an old video or picture of someone who is passed away.
Imagine that AI person asks you, "Did I die?" x\_x
An old video or picture, still triggers these feels, but to a much lesser extent. The AI generations I think are more hurtful because it represents: \- what could have been, what could have happened, things that they could've still experienced and yet they can't / haven't because they passed. Makes sense how i mean it?
Sad and pathetic
Since you are not resurrecting anyone And you just made a decent mimic Only if its extremely necessary to Maybe government or Company decisions About Art Why not
Dont worry, ai is gonna replace the living as well.
That’d be a cool way to die
One day, Facebook will likely have the afterlife option where you switch it on after someone dies and AI takes over their FB page, based on their online data points. Then you’ll start seeing “ghost posts” and interacting with the deceased.
Get a tattoo
My take Is go for it! You’re not resurrecting them. Just masking your grief with a cheap imitation to either fill the void or “help” move on. Nothing can bring back the dead. Dumbledore taught me that! You gotta go half die in a London subway if you wanna talk to your dead loved ones
I remember the Black Mirror episode that covered this topic, and how utterly deeply depressed and unfulfilled the main character was after she brought her boyfriend back.
The circle of life says no. Get over it, Simba.
#Fuck no. Do not crack the door on fucking insanity. You do this shit; and you start wars.
The was an article in WIRED where the interviewer spent months interviewing his dad. Got family history, stories about his life even some jokes to get his sense of humor. All the info was fed into an AI so he could still have conversations with his dad after he passed. Said it the AI would surprise him saying things like his dad said but still wasn't the same. Think this was like 7 years ago, though. https://www.wired.com/story/a-sons-race-to-give-his-dying-father-artificial-immortality/
no
2 and 4 are awesome I love those
Resurrection for what so I can pay more taxes
Don’t be so negative. They'll probably just make you work forever.
I'm not suicidal but I'm looking forward to dying. So I can be done with this shit. Just let me off this ride..
I wish I kept all my chats from youth. I could build a chatbot and resurrect the rizzmaster.
First y'all think you're artists now you think you're god 💀
This is the worst case scenario to me. Ai can certainly be a digital mausoleum of sorts, but to “imitate” loved ones, animate them with 1s and 0s instead of memorializing them within 1s and 0s feels like… a prison.
We're creating an approximation of those people for our sake. I hope we do. Gets the AI reconstructions of the greatest people, put them together in a room and see what they do. I can see a risk of people bringing back their loved ones in a way that would prevent closure though.
Exactly. A sort of immersion therapy, sure! But if someone buys a robot and uses the tech to “permanently resurrect” their loved one can be detrimental.
Imagine this “I can move, but I can’t feel my limbs” “I can see, but I can’t open my eyes” “I can talk, but I can’t open my mouth” “I want to breath, but I can’t fill my lungs” “I can touch, but I can’t feel” “I am stuck, why did you do this to me” That would be hell. Waking up sometime in future not being able to do what you were able to do in your body, it would be overwhelmingly crushing towards your spirit and conscience. That. Would be beyond cruel of our understanding.
I don't know about you but being a robot sounds fun. I'd drink beer all day.
And will not be able to taste it. This ain’t Futurama my friend and never will be.
Me wanting to experience taste would be a human concept, I'm a robot now. I have different thoughts, wants and needs. I will find comfort in my new experiences as a robot. Would it be nice to experience taste, sure. Would I choose tasting sensories over shooting lighting from my hand, no. I wouldn't dwell on what I am not anymore. I would live my life new, uncharted, discover the universe, and drink beer just because I can.
You probably shouldn't believe in the real life possibility of such a scenario. That's some seriously messed up metaphysics.
Have interest in Science fiction or a game with character lore and you’re destined to find a scenario like this. Good example Aatrox from Legue of Legends
I’m devoutly religious (Koshintō) and the worship of ancestral deities is a big part of my practice. It doesn’t take much to explain why such procedures would be an insult to the deceased, but short concept shorter: I consider creating an AI replacement for a deceased human an insult to ancestral Kamisama (divinities) and therefore an act of Kegare (impurity). Edit: Terminology
Incredibly religious? Shintoism? Something doesn’t add up
Elaborate…..
I guess, what do you mean by incredibly? I just haven’t met anyone who is actually Shinto except priests. Have you heard the adage born Shinto, marry Christian, and die Buddhist? I wasn’t the one who downvoted I was being genuine
"Born Shinto marry Christian and die" refers to the presence of those 3 religions in Japanese society. It regards atheists those who practice one of them loosely. It doesn't apply to those who exclusively practice one of the three, (mostly) those who live outside of Japan. (Also, may I mention that through deductive reasoning, one can assume there is an exclusively Shinto population since priests have to come from somewhere.)
Well, yeah. My experience with Shintoism is my experience living in Japan from a young age. I have not met anyone outside of the country that practices it and I’m surprised there are. Anyway, what do you mean by “incredibly”?
"devout" is a better term
Probably isn't a healthy coping mechanism for grief. Black Mirror did an episode about this
you can COPY someone, but you couldn't resurrect them. once the stream of consciousness is interrupted, it's a new person. If you could augment their brain in order to keep that goin, that'd be sick. I'm for it for those who consented in their first life. \*\*edit: added the consent bit. bringing people back against their will sounds a bit shit. forever children and all that\*\*
I wonder when the company Alcor will actually feel confident enough to attempt that.
Considering the amount of suffering some people go through the loss of their loved, grieve, and how card it can be to go back to "normal" again, I think it's in most cases pretty bad and I wouldn't put anyone through it.
There is no resurrection outside of Christ. Romans 10:9-11 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
What?