Would it make a difference if the laws of physics prevent or allow a machine from operating in ‘duplicate’ mode?

  • m532@lemmy.ml
    19·
    9 days ago

    Of course. Fastest travel = best travel.

    And the whole “you might die” sounds like big oil propaganda to me. I bet car accident deaths are way more likely.

    • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
      2·
      8 days ago

      But it’s not really the same kind of calculation as the car accident though. It’d be impossible to know if anyone using it ever had died from doing so, so impossible to compare the statistics and the concern is about whether the act of being teleported constitutes dying so depending on the answer to that the odds are either 100% or 0 (unless they have some kind of safety issue with more traditional, visible death or injury that bumps that up to something above 0% but below 100).

  • CarlSagansMeatplanet@lemmy.world
    13·
    9 days ago

    I imagine even if there is a strong philosophical argument that it’s a “you die and it’s a copy/clone that comes out” in this scenario that people would still use it just from social and economic pressures. It would become normalized to work on the other side of the planet and just teleport there, your friends might be scattered across the globe, and not using the tech would put you at a massive disadvantage to everyone.

    It’s a fun one to think about though - our consciousness is interrupted at different levels all the time (Sleep, injury, anesthesia etc), would a teeny tiny interruption from being rebuilt, make you any less you? Perhaps the scary thought is “you” aren’t something continuous, and that teleporting (dying/being rebuilt) isn’t really that different than just normal living.

    All that said - I’d probably grow up with the technology and use it while trying my best to never ever think about the details!

    • SpicyAnt@mander.xyzOP
      6·
      9 days ago

      I think similarly…

      Hypothetically: I spent my childhood and early teens using teleportation machines and I never had an issue. As a teenager, I learn about people who are strongly opposed to teleportation. People around me talk negatively about these people, and are perhaps annoyed at the laws that are made to accommodate those who choose not to teleport. They are seen as a nuisance because they complicate workplace dynamics because they don’t want to do something simple and convenient that most in society do. The belief they hold makes most people uncomfortable because of the philosophical implication.

      So, as a teenager, I realize that to become a ‘non-teleporter’ I need to accept that I have already chosen to destroy myself multiple times, and that my family and friends who leave are not the same that come back. It would be so difficult to make this philosophical mind-shift and stop teleporting so that copy #4,242 gets to live.

  • Anna@lemmy.ml
    8·
    9 days ago

    I would encourage everyone else to use it. So roads will be less crowded and I can enjoy nature in its true beauty. Assuming of course Big Corpos haven’t completely ruined it.

  • Bwaz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    9 days ago

    Well, for a robust teleport function it should first make a duplicate of you at the target location. Check that it went well and if all good, then blast the original you into a cloud of red fog.

  • ByteMe@lemmy.world
    2·
    9 days ago

    I remember watching a documentary about teleportation that said that the biggest issue doesn’t seem to be how to reconstruct the body rather than how you reconstruct the consciousness

  • kibiz0r@midwest.socialEnglish
    2·
    9 days ago

    Emerson Green convinced me that p-zombies are plausible. So there’s no way to know if a teleporter would end your consciousness.

    • taiyang@lemmy.world
      5·
      9 days ago

      Third parties promise not to store your duplicate information and never use it to implant memories and desires into your subconsciousness. They promise!