X-Message-Number: 4737 From: Eugen Leitl <> Newsgroups: sci.cryonics Subject: Re: Rebooting a suspendee Date: Sat, 5 Aug 1995 02:15:40 +0200 Message-ID: <> References: <> <3veele$> <> <3vtnj9$> On 4 Aug 1995, Brian Wowk wrote: > > In <> (Anders Sandberg) writes: [ rewarming snipped ] > >I think it is odd that there should exist animosity between > >uploaders and cryonicists, in my opinion the two areas are > >so interlinked they are hard to distinguish. To get > >uploading we need a biological know-how, computer power and > >technology not far from cryonics, and the knowledge gained > >from uploading research is obviously applicable to cryonics. Particularly, data from destructive tissue scan as a calibration basis to assess and help to optimize cryosuspension for minimum damage. Though degree of successful desuspension says us something, we could still have perfect structure preservation at few nm scale yet with totally denaturated proteins at sub nm scale. Since cryonics needs nanorepair to reverse terminal damage, denaturated proteins should not be a problem. Theoretically, one could use low concentrations of glutaraldehyde (a common crosslinking agent) as an auxiliary cryoperfusion component though I wouln't dream of proposing it for several obvious reasons. > There is no inherent animosity between cryonicists > and uploaders. In this case it is purely personal. It comes > from years of being told by uploaders that cryonics is > crude and unperfected, and that uploading is much more > interesting and promising. It comes from watching Hans Cryonics is crude and unperfected. But it exists (well, the cryosuspension part of it) while uploading is currently only an idea. All the hard work in cryonics has been done by cryonists and not uploaders. So far, uploaders, myself included, have only delivered grand speeches. I do not like this one bit, but this is a fact. > Moravec sell thousands of copies of Mind Children, while Mind Children is a worthwhile read, but not because it focuses on uploading. In fact I laughed aloud when I first saw the nanobush picture. The one single thing that knocked my socks off, was one page describing a particular MIT Life implementation enhancement which was hot stuff. There were several things more, but that was by far the most important. > Charles Platt (a professional author of dozens of successful > books) cannot even find a publisher for a book about cryonics. Do you think you can persuade him to make the manuscript available via ftp or www if he won't be able to publish it? I don't think paper copy sales would be loosing any bucks to internet publishing in any case. > It comes from watching people post elaborate plans for > interferometric brain scanners on CryoNet, and assert that > personal development work on such scanners will do more > to increase their life expectancy than cryonics arrangements. Concerning brain interferometry: one has to use the right kind of waves. Ultrasonics is much too coarse and damaging, EM waves are too long to be of any value and xRay and Gamma don't have no monochromatic coherent sources, and would incrementally destroy the tissue due to rad damage accumulation. All those imagings would require a vitrified brain since the aquisition rate is so slow. Roentgen optics imaging of very small brain blocks is maybe possible, though I am not optimistic here. Abrasive AFM imaging is my current favourite. Certainly high enough resolution and a kHz to MHz data aquisition rate to match. > It comes from the realization that most (though certainly > not all) uploaders are more interested in talking about the > future than getting to the future. Can such discussions be found on the cryonet archive? I would like to read them. Btw archive, the www archive site is highly uncomplete. Will earlier messages be included as well? I found the mail retrieval procedure unwieldy, www is much simpler. > There are certainly exceptions to the above (such > as Eugen Leitl, and perhaps yourself). But in my experience > uploaders who take the logical step of becoming cryonicists > are very rare, and it is the hypocrisy of this that frustrates > me more than anything else. I would say that the absolute number of uploaders is small, even smaller than cryonists'. This might be reason for low subscription numbers. Their average age might be lower; I assume most guys subscribe at a slightly more advanced age due to better finances and increased awareness of unavoidable exitus. Maybe this is all cheap rationalization, though. -- Eugene > ---Brian Wowk > > > Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4737