Asklemmy

44149 readers

1945 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

189

Would you use teleporter technology if it existed? Why or Why not? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

316 comments fedilink hide all child comments

You know those sci-fi teleporters like in Star Trek where you disappear from one location then instantaneously reappear in another location? Do you trust that they are safe to use?

To fully understand my question, you need to understand the safety concerns regarding teleporters as explained in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQHBAdShgYI

spoiler

I wouldn't, because the person that reappears aint me, its a fucking clone. Teleporters are murder machines. Star Trek is a silent massacre!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you're comfortable being vaporised and then a single identical clone being created elsewhere then good for you, I guess.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why should it be a clone and not the original you? This is all theoretical

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the mechanism is that you are broken down in to your constituent matter and then that template is used to reconstruct you elsewhere, then how could it be anything other than a clone? Even if "the same matter" is used to reconstruct you, a copy is just being precisely pieced together based on your template. Surely?

If you were just scanned to build your pattern and then a transporter just spat out another you using that pattern, what would that other you be?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it is using the same matter then how could it possibly be a copy?

If I take a Lego set, deconstruct here and reconstruct it over there, is the one over there now a copy/clone? Or is it the same thing?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I would explicitly say that it was a copy of what I originally built, but that it is not my original build. What I consider to be me is the consistently maintained configuration of matter, primarily my brain, rather than the constituent matter. If I am unconfigured then I would consider myself dead, and then any further reconfiguration of me I would consider to be a replica of my original configuration.

As a wise philosopher once said:

No disassemble!!!