Even if fillings were 100% free I'd still try to manage my diet and brush my teeth because fillings freaking suck.
Even if they could resurrect me from death, I'd still do my best to avoid it because death, as far as any of us can tell, freaking sucks.
After seeing the unprecedented explosion of growth in technology just during my lifetime I'm not ruling anything out. Plus it's a thought experiment anyway, so lighten up.
Fixed. You have not lived until you have eaten a deep fried twinkie.
You just don't know what it feels like to not have saturated fat clogging your arteries and bloating your intestines. That's not to say people don't feel great in the moment where they eat sugar or fat, of course you do, but you will have less energy, your brain will experience withdrawal and you'll feel like shit.
As I've seen from your posting history, you don't live in America, so I highly doubt you know much of the situation here, especially in poorer states.
- - - Updated - - -
Even cooking, buying healthy ingredients is often more expensive than cheap processed foods. Then there's the concept of time, where a lot of people at or below the poverty line are working multiple jobs, leaving little time to do anything.
I actually think that at some point in the 2030s or 2040s we'll have injectable nanobots that will effectively keep your cholesterol in check and body fat % in a healthy range. Once that's proven technology, you can bet your ass I'll live off bourbon, beer, wings, pizza and steak.
Rudimentary creatures of blood and flesh. You touch my mind, fumbling in ignorance, incapable of understanding.
You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it.
Sovereign
Mass Effect
Except that the original you wouldn't know that you are dead. Direct transfer of consciousness or a copy implanted into the new body? Doesn't make one shred of difference, it would still be YOU waking up in the new body, as if you just woke up from a nights sleep. Ofc there would be the lingering thoughts about how your original body is gone, and it would probably feel weird at first, but that's not what you are arguing against.
They're (short for They are) describes a group of people. "They're/They are a nice bunch of guys." Their indicates that something belongs/is related to a group of people. "Their car was all out of fuel." There refers to a location. "Let's set up camp over there." There is also no such thing as "could/should OF". The correct way is: Could/should'VE, or could/should HAVE.
Holyfury armory
Yes, because you're fucking dead, you don't know anything anymore because you have ceased being alive.Except that the original you wouldn't know that you are dead.
No, it would be a COPY of you waking up in the new body... YOU are the original, not the copy. If you die, and the copy gets created to replace you, YOU, the original, will not suddenly start experiencing life through the copy's body, you are fucking dead, your existence is over. This system does not extend your life past death if you take additional risks and end up getting yourself killed... You still have every reason to fear death, because if you die, you are gone, a copy is created to live on as if it were you, and it would believe it is, essentially only accomplishing making your friends and family not feel like you have died... But you, the original consciousness, have died, your life is over, your journey is done.
A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.
So what if I told you that you were killed at night while asleep once a week, and replaced with a clone who had your memories. It's the exact same principle.
When you wake up tomorrow, you don't know that anything has changed. You might be the 500th clone for all we know, but you still think you are the original.
Also, the OP was about transferring the original consciousness directly into a new body, not copy/pasting it, so that kind of makes all your complains and arguments invalid anyway. Actually, when I think about it, we are already doing this, just on a smaller scale. We are already replacing individual faulty organs, the only difference is that in this example the entire body is replaced.
Last edited by ThrashMetalFtw; 2017-06-11 at 06:02 AM.
They're (short for They are) describes a group of people. "They're/They are a nice bunch of guys." Their indicates that something belongs/is related to a group of people. "Their car was all out of fuel." There refers to a location. "Let's set up camp over there." There is also no such thing as "could/should OF". The correct way is: Could/should'VE, or could/should HAVE.
Holyfury armory
I don't think we will have that kind of tech by 2050, maybe by 2150 if we don't all die from disease and famine brought on by climate change before then.
Even if something like this were available (and affordable) within my lifetime, I would probably eat healthy with the occasional burger or pizza. I hate how sick I feel when I eat too much junk food.
The tech doesn't exist, so, no. and you say that as if I shouldn't be bothered that someone is sneaking into my house once a week and murdering me.
Correction, when the clone wakes up tomorrow the clone doesn't know anything has changed, but the original entity is still dead, their consciousness was destroyed and replaced with a copy, they do not suddenly start living on as the copy, they are dead... Just because the clone doesn't know any different doesn't make the original any less dead.When you wake up tomorrow, you don't know that anything has changed. You might be the 500th clone for all we know, but you still think you are the original.
I seriously don't get how people continually fail to grasp the concept of this.
If I clone you while you're still alive, you don't experience anything the clone does, it's a completely separate entity, that holds true if you are dead. You and the clone have different consciousness, if you die, you are dead, you don't start experiencing life as the clone, the clone is not you, it is a separate entity.
Not in the event of death, that is in the event of "hey I want a new body because I got fat/broke my leg/whatever, cook me up one and transfer me in"... Re read the OP, he specifically mentions a backup copy stored "in case of sudden death", that is copy/paste, not transferal, and that sudden death contingency is what this entire comment string you jumped into is about.Also, the OP was about transferring the original consciousness directly into a new body, not copy/pasting it, so that kind of makes all your complains and arguments invalid anyway.
Except it isn't, because those organs don't contain our consciousness.Actually, when I think about it, we are already doing this, just on a smaller scale. We are already replacing individual faulty organs
and the entire body being replaced, without a transferal of consciousness, is death of the original.the only difference is that in this example the entire body is replaced.
Last edited by Schattenlied; 2017-06-11 at 07:04 AM.
A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.
Yes I would still eat healthy because I want muscular arms and shoulders and a lean, narrow waistline as opposed to being a blob on life support hoping I don't die changing bodies/bodyparts (doesnt matter if its fuckin free)
You realize that dietary fat doesn't "clog your arteries" the moment you consume it, right? I do feel a bit fat lately because I've let myself get carried away and am up to ~13% body fat, but under no circumstances would anyone that knows me characterize me as fat and low energy.
- - - Updated - - -
This is mostly false. As I laid out in this post:
I'd have to go find the data, but my recollection is that the average person watches ~5 hours/day of television and that the number is higher for the low income. The average poor American literally spends more time watching TV than working. They're not that busy for the most part.They don't work much, on average. Per CBPP (a pro-SNAP entity):
Some quick math tells us that $10K/year at minimum wage is 1390 hours of work (less in many states). That's a shade under 27 hours/week.About 93 percent of SNAP benefits go to households with incomes below the poverty line, and 58 percent go to households below half of the poverty line (about $10,080 for a family of three in 2016).
Put another way, more than half of SNAP spending goes to households that work less than 27 hours/week.
Put another another, it's wrong to say that SNAP recipients don't work, but accurate to say that they don't work much.
Also, by definition, working a large number of hours puts someone above the poverty line.
since healthy food tastes better to me, than fast food - yeah, probably
"And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five?
A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head."
Id rather have it run on petroleum or coal but whatevs.. yea I'd still eat healthy. Id feel less guilty about drinking moonshine though.. and home made wine, cider and all the other stuff.