Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!bloom-beacon!mintaka!yale!think!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!nanotech From: shapard@manta.nosc.mil (Thomas D. Shapard) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: SPECULATION AND QUESTIONS Keywords: gate operations, virus, mental state Message-ID: Date: 9 Feb 90 01:52:09 GMT Sender: nanotech@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego Lines: 51 Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu David Allen Duke writes: [skipping...other stuff, mostly covered by JoSH comments] >In regards to discussions about cryonics on this newsgroup: > >In a technology advanced enough to literally raise you from the dead >(frozen), I think the new limitation imposed on that society would simply >be raw material. True, but for the most part 'raw material' means plain dirt, nanotech being much less fussy about the macro from of raw materials than present technology is. And if you're worrying about running out of dirt, then there's the asteroid belt (as I recall Drexler suggested in EOC). > What will the motivation be for that future society to >recover you? What will you offer? Should you sign an agreement before >you die stating that you will abide by the laws of that future society? Pretend for the moment that some effective form of perservation has been in use for the last 200 yrs or so, and now, today, the technology comes on line to bring people back for, oh say $100K apiece (with the usual expectation of declining cost as time goes on and we learn more). Who would YOU like to bring back? How much would you contribute to bring back specific people, or to a research fund to bring the cost down further? If you're like me, you'd have a list of friends and relatives you'd like to see again, and you'd have a list of famous folks you'd like to see back again enough to contribute to the cause. In fact wouldn't it be an exciting time: people who in previous ages would have been lost forever actually returning, you - me - everyone getting to meet them, talk to them have them HERE again! The analogy with a future time, of n years from now, when the assumtions of technological ability come true is obvious. They will have personal personal interests in helping those preserved back to life. It's not a matter of some impersonal *society* deciding whether on not to bring people back, it's *people* deciding, wanting to bring other people back. There will certainly be problems for those returning (future shock in spades). But that's another topic. -- ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' Tom Shapard shapard@nosc.mil NOSC, San Diego