Interesting idea raised by Jimmy in another thread - if an advanced race fully understood their DNA they could recreate themselves as they saw fit. Topic for discussion: What would be the ultimate modifications?
I'm imagining almost all brain, living in an almost indestructible metal shell connected to robotic limbs that could be changed out as necessary. What do YOU think?
Thought this may be relevant to the topic
There are much better ways of designing a transhuman experience that might allow us to live beyond our bodies. The idea of a simple copy paste falls short. Simply making a copy of your consciousness into some sort of super computer might allow your loved ones to have access to a copy of you after you die - seemingly giving you immortality - but you still die.
That is why I'd never use a Star Trek transporter. The "me" on the other end might look like me and talk like me and have memories like me and be as educated as me, but I don't see how the consciousness would be anything other than a twin of my consciousness, not my exact same consciousness.
@Heather, I don't know about the consciousness part. What you speak of does indeed fall short. Without the senses there would be no consciousness. I wouldn't think. I think that brief article was referring to memory stored in the brain. To add back some of the senses, i.e. sight and sound, motion, pressure sensors, would require peripheral robotic sensors. That's is being entertained also. We could eliminate the pain part.
But it's not just that. If I make a copy of you to an android version of you - then you will still exist concurrently with the android. Now, if I point a gun at your face and tell you I'm going to kill you, will you just be ok with that because there is a copy of you in the android that will go on after I pull the trigger?
Simply making a copy does not allow the original to live on after the destruction of the original - the original still dies.
@Heather, Yes the original still dies....that is the moment that the copy adds to it's original memory content, where the original can not.
No I wouldn't be ok with a gun in my face.
You don't understand. The copy does not start adding to the original memory content AFTER the original dies - the copy starts adding as soon as it's made an initiated. The original still exists, and has not left the body, until that body dies. You could kill the original at the moment of initiating the copy - but the original still dies. The original does not 'live on' in the copy - the copy just continues from the point where the copy was made.
@Heather...I concurred that the original does indeed die. But the memory data of that original remains intact in the copy......now, the original can not have new experiences after the body dies.....but the copy can. Making it unlike the original. Maybe I don't understand.
Well I'm just pointing out that making a copy of yourself does not allow you to extend your experiences beyond your biological life - that the copy/paste method of cloning consciousness takes us no closer to immortality.
@Heather...why not? if the copy can retain memory, and store new memory it would store all future new experiences. I would expect the copy to have memory of a biological past as well.
The copy goes on the extend upon your memories - but you still die. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to convey. It seemed most clear when I asked if you would be ok with it if I shot you in the face as soon as the copying was done.
Would you feel better if at the point of transferring a copy of your brain map into a "new" brain/body unit that all your existing neural connections were severed?
That way only the "new you" would exist as a continuance of the "old you". The "old you" would be gone but the "continuance you" would go on in the form of the "new you".
Thereby allowing for your "mind" to continue having and learning from new experiences, possibly forever.