User Profile


Recent Posts

Curated Posts
starCurated - Recent, high quality posts selected by the LessWrong moderation team.
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed
Frontpage Posts
Posts meeting our frontpage guidelines: • interesting, insightful, useful • aim to explain, not to persuade • avoid meta discussion • relevant to people whether or not they are involved with the LessWrong community.
(includes curated content and frontpage posts)
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed
All Posts
personIncludes personal and meta blogposts (as well as curated and frontpage).
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed

Can we decrease the risk of worse-than-death outcomes following brain preservation?

1 min read
Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Mike Darwin on animal research, moral cowardice, and reasoning in an uncaring universe

6 min read
Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Brief response to kalla724 on preserving personal identity with vitrification

3 min read
Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Mike Darwin on the Less Wrong intelligentsia

Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Umbilical cord stem cell banking for future medical use

Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Mike Darwin on Kurzweil, Techno-Optimism, and Delusional Stances on Cryonics

Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Mike Darwin on Steve Jobs's hypocritical stance towards death

Show Highlightsubdirectory_arrow_left

Recent Comments

Upvoted -- I agree that the probability is higher if you do cryonics.

However, a lot of the framing of this discussion is that "if you choose cryonics, you are opening up Pandora's box because of the possibility of worse-than-death outcomes." This triggers all sort of catastrophic cognitions and c...(read more)

Well, this is certainly a reasonable response. But if there is a mechanism to decrease the probability that a worse-than-death outcome would occur so that people who had expressed these concerns are more likely to want to do brain preservation and more people could be a part of the future, that seem...(read more)

I think I did not explain my proposal clearly enough. What I'm claiming is if that you could see *intermediate steps* suggesting that a worst-type future is imminent, or merely crosses your probability threshold as "too likely", then you could enumerate those and request to be removed from biostasis...(read more)

> it is very likely that my ticket out will be Alzheimer's or another neurodegenerative disease. In that case, cryopreservation will only make sense if I commit suicide at the very onset of the disease and am frozen right away which may not be possible. If I get Alzheimer's I may as well donate all ...(read more)

Can you describe the reasons are that make you think it is not likely enough to work? Totally understandable if you can't articulate such reasons, but I'm just curious about what the benchmarks are that you might find useful in informing your probability estimate.

That is to say, it's unlikely tha...(read more)

> "Brain degradation after death" is the key point in this list that I'd be interested in learning about. I'm not sure if it's proper to ask this in a comment now or should I be studying diligently around the issue, but I think it's also an interesting subject so excuse me.

Yes, good intuition. Thi...(read more)

> simply long-term structural changes in the brain to seeing memories as the products of "continuous enzymatic activity"

Long-term structural maintenance *requires* continuous enzymatic activity. For example, the average AMPA receptor lasts only around one day: more)

but another large part of it is mediated by hormones going to and from the rest of your body

Upvoted the post. Worthy thing to discuss.

A reply to kalla724 that you did not mention is here:

Kalla724 claims that it is not possible to upload a C. elegans with particular memories and/or behaviors. I think that th...(read more)