20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?
I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.
When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.
Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.
I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.
It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.
Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P
This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles
Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!
Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?
I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P
But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...
the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.
Hmm
I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"
On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.
(I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)
to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy
i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness
i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though
I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P
I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with
*this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff
Unrelatedly, grading is hard.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
0
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?
I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.
When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.
Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.
I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.
or you can just lick the paste off
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+3
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
20 tabs without going crazy, do you guys just leave your pcs running 24/7 with all your apps running 24/7 too?
I do pretty much leave my PC on all the time. I realize I should probably stop doing this.
When Corsair hurries up and sends me the check for my cooler I'll get right on that.
Gotta razor blade off the thermal paste and buy a new CPU cooler I guess. Corsair 250D, looks like I can get a nice single radiator cooler thing for the front fan.
I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.
or you can just lick the paste off
It's full of vitamin J
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
IlpalaJust this guy, y'knowTexasRegistered Userregular
I usually have like ten tabs open but the browser deloads 'em if I haven't looked at 'em in a while so whatever. Lot of 'em are video game research tabs like if I need to find a specific item in XIV and want to see when/where the gathering node it's in spawns. Or in the case of DQ8, a big ass text walkthrough that I want to save my current spot in. Or else just shit someone's linked me and I eventually get around to looking at.
FF XIV - Qih'to Furishu (on Siren), Battle.Net - Ilpala#1975
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.
Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P
This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles
Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!
Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?
I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P
But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...
the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.
Hmm
I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"
On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.
(I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)
to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy
i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness
i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though
I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P
I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with
*this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff
Unrelatedly, grading is hard.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.
Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:
- the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
- the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
- you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
- you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
- druids love rust monsters
- if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor
Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:
- the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
- the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
- you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
- you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
- druids love rust monsters
- if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor
Delmain Belasco32 Ludious cptrugged
"Hey buddy, how's it going? oh, no, no metal here. These guys have lots though, maybe try them?"
It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.
Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P
This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles
Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!
Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?
I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P
But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...
the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.
Hmm
I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"
On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.
(I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)
to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy
i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness
i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though
I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P
I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with
*this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff
Unrelatedly, grading is hard.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.
It does seem that consciousness, as a physical process, is manipulable and divisible. I don't know that that is really an objection to the idea of continuity, though.
sometimes i'll open 25 porn tabs and then use hot keys to switch between them while jacking it, conducting my own little erotic symphony to crescendo with my favorite clip during climax
or if i'm researching something i'm buying i might have 10 or 15 different reviews open
but i'm fairly sure i've never had as many as 30 tabs
1500?
those nights when you stay up way too late trying to find the perfect one
>_>
is this how your dick went raw
0
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.
Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P
This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles
Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!
Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?
I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P
But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...
the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.
Hmm
I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"
On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.
(I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)
to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy
i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness
i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though
I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P
I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with
*this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff
Unrelatedly, grading is hard.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
Right - I'm saying that this is constantly happening every moment. In the case of cloning, you both will have the perception of continuity. You could argue that it doesn't exist in one case, and is only a perception... but I think that equally applies to the non-cloned case, and our treatment of them as different cases is a mental kludge to make things easier. The me of yesterday had different knowledge, different feelings, would react to situations (slightly) differently based on a host of things... and for a while, this meat bag was unconscious! I'm not sure why I should think that I'm the same person of yesterday, and if I do, I'm not sure why, in a case where I was killed and rebuilt at the end of sleep as though I'd slept, I should think that it's any different.
I think this is an easier, clearer case, but I also think that it applies moment to moment as our memories, emotions, and thoughts change. Reducing the time on that to zero changes nothing, we are still beings that exist only through change. Given that, the particular structure and changes are all that matters.
I actually do have a weird gut feeling about this, I just think that gut feeling is wrong.
(incidentally, I don't think that continuity exists. I think during sleep the body is basically someone else - it's so different, how could it be me? I wake up with the hallucinations of a different being, who's affected deeply by me, in my mind.)
It seems trivial to me that we exist only as molecules in motion, rather than static arrangements, and that as molecules are replaceable by identical ones, all essential things cannot be due to the identity of individual particles. Thus, the person that exists from t1 to t2 is fundamentally different from the person who exists from t2 to t3, and that relationship would be the same whether nothing happened at t2 or the person were suddenly switched three feet to the right, but otherwise identical.
Therefore get over it and teleport everywhere :P
This makes a lot of assumptions about identity re: particles
Also particles are never identical as one of their properties is always necessarily different, i.e. their locations in space!
Assumptions which are true, and can be shown by destructive and constructive interference, iirc?
I recall reading a blog post by an angry quantum guy who wanted to yell at philosophers over this very thing :P
But in any case there is no such thing as absolute position, so all that matters is relative position...
the real issue is that we don't understand consciousness or even qualitative experience enough to make assumptions about duplicating or destroying brains. i wouldn't step into that thing.
Hmm
I am torn, because on the one hand, I want to go "ok, fair"
On the other hand I approach 100% certain that everything we experience is somewhere in the brain, in the form of various processes that only are affected by relative positions and forces that are constantly shifting and would not be affected by such a thing.
(I am legitimately surprised that you would not step into a teleporter, actually.)
to clarify, i'm talking about the one that destroys the original and makes a copy
i am troubled by e.g. a thought experiment in which the machine simply creates a copy without destroying the original; obviously this would not transfer or disrupt my consciousness in any way so copies are not "me" and would not "transfer" my consciousness
i rather think that such duplication may actually be completely physically impossible, though
I'm only troubled by that insofar as there are limited resources (such as.. Querry...) that one me is going to be heartbroken to lose :P
I see your point; I think, however, that my objection is to what you are treating as axiomatic - that there is one "you" and that consciousness is a thing that is transferred independently of the continuing motion and interaction of particles, which I think silently lies under everything here. If you accept that consciousnesses require constant interactions, and that you are not the same person as ten years ago because the interactions are different*, then it follows pretty easily that identity is constantly shifting as its components move around, and that that is the only thing we really need bee concerned with
*this might be hard for some to swallow, but I don't think you can actually meaningfully say that you are without relying on non-physicalist stuff
Unrelatedly, grading is hard.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
But what about when you sever your corpus callosum and have a consciousness residing in each hemisphere and then reconnect the two hemispheres and go back to having one consciousness.
This is another issue, which is that our identity is more fragmented than even we know.
I am legion, for we are many.
0
cptruggedI think it has something to do with free will.Registered Userregular
Facts about this D&D game that i learned last night:
- the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
- the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
- you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
- you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
- druids love rust monsters - if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor
-Delmain -Belasco32 -Ludious -cptrugged
Ain't nobody trusting no GM. Also, I have a feeling we aren't the best at "preparation".
I don't experience my consciousness as particularly continuous.
so you all felt like you were different people while writing this post, or
I don't remember.
0
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
shit I'm tired.
are YOU on the beer list?
+1
Hi I'm Vee!Formerly VH; She/Her; Is an E X P E R I E N C ERegistered Userregular
Wait, are people still talking about the 1000 or 500 tab thing like it's real? 21stCentury said it's more like 200+ and the vast majority of that is porn tabs in a single window, which hardly counts.
@spool32 I peeded out a fire in my D&D group 3 weeks ago.
It was a 10/10 experience.
The week before that I picked up our gnome warlock and threw her up an embankment ... she didn't stick the landing and came tumbling back down which set off a trap.
The pee night I also did a sick ninja flip in chainmail armor over some bramble and landed on a cultists head killing him (I get the sickest natty 20s when I do these things). ... trying to climb back over the bramble I got stuck.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
+2
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
Hmm EM I am actually curious:
Can you define what it would mean for, in the case of this transporter thing, your consciousness to cease and someone else's to be there? Especially in a way that's distinguishable from sleep and whatnot?
I just realized that I don't even think I can do that.
- The Forums Here
- E-mail
- Random things that I intend to get back to reading later. Often just get closed after a few hours when I decide I'm not going to read it after all.
0
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
Can you define what it would mean for, in the case of this transporter thing, your consciousness to cease and someone else's to be there? Especially in a way that's distinguishable from sleep and whatnot?
I just realized that I don't even think I can do that.
That's (the sleep thing) is how I see teleportation.
Like I'm not consciously aware of when I go to sleep, it's just like BAM I wake up and time has passed. Am I real? If I cut my arm is it a robot arm and the last 33 years are just memory implants?
Posts
Also intend not to use bookmarks and just use my history or researching for things.
I'd not use razors, sounds like a good way to cause scratches. Isopropyl and microfiber disposables easily gets it all off.
Better than 500 things eating up your memory making your computer run like shit because you think you'll look at the other 700 tabs soonish.
The whole difficulty of consciousness is exactly that: we experience it as singular and continuous even though it is presumably ever-changing.
Nonetheless, it is axiomatic that my consciousness is distinct from that of other individuals. As a result, if you copy me exactly and produce a clone, it is not me, necessarily. It's not as though I will experience a consciousness of two experiences, as there is no soul being divided between them. I (as in, that self which perceives a continuous conscious experience) will continue to be conscious as my original. I don't see how this would be altered by destroying the original, or how that scenario would be different from destroying the original while making no copy.
Basically, it seems that consciousness necessarily requires a kind of continuity, and that continuity does exist. If that continuity does not exist then consciousness does not exist in a meaningful way, I think.
or you can just lick the paste off
It's full of vitamin J
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
The other 1% is TV Tropes
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
- the bard knows a lot of ways to insult insects
- the barbarian occasionally does enough damage to actually erase a monster from the rulebook
- you can make the wizard happy by giving him a pet sword
- you can make the wizard abandon the party in search of a shower by spraying bug goo all over him
- druids love rust monsters
- if you say "resistance potion, perhaps to acid", no one in the party will believe it's an acid resistance potion until one of them has been nearly melted into the floor
@Delmain @Belasco32 @Ludious @cptrugged
It starts with fifty tabs open and a week later you're keeping jars of wee just in case
I'm pretty much covered by the "most used sites" on my new tab front page on chrome.
I'm used to my system by now, though. Bookmarks seem less convenient.
I have 16GB of RAM, so I don't worry about the memory usage.
Some of us don't have murderous blackout spells.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
What subs do you follow?
Now that r/altright is banned I mean.
ONE
"Hey buddy, how's it going? oh, no, no metal here. These guys have lots though, maybe try them?"
It does seem that consciousness, as a physical process, is manipulable and divisible. I don't know that that is really an objection to the idea of continuity, though.
I'm not murderous when I'm blind.
At 500+ tabs, you should.
those nights when you stay up way too late trying to find the perfect one
>_>
is this how your dick went raw
Right - I'm saying that this is constantly happening every moment. In the case of cloning, you both will have the perception of continuity. You could argue that it doesn't exist in one case, and is only a perception... but I think that equally applies to the non-cloned case, and our treatment of them as different cases is a mental kludge to make things easier. The me of yesterday had different knowledge, different feelings, would react to situations (slightly) differently based on a host of things... and for a while, this meat bag was unconscious! I'm not sure why I should think that I'm the same person of yesterday, and if I do, I'm not sure why, in a case where I was killed and rebuilt at the end of sleep as though I'd slept, I should think that it's any different.
I think this is an easier, clearer case, but I also think that it applies moment to moment as our memories, emotions, and thoughts change. Reducing the time on that to zero changes nothing, we are still beings that exist only through change. Given that, the particular structure and changes are all that matters.
I actually do have a weird gut feeling about this, I just think that gut feeling is wrong.
(incidentally, I don't think that continuity exists. I think during sleep the body is basically someone else - it's so different, how could it be me? I wake up with the hallucinations of a different being, who's affected deeply by me, in my mind.)
so you all felt like you were different people while writing this post, or
I evidently can't. This is me watching a video. The video is paused.
This is another issue, which is that our identity is more fragmented than even we know.
I am legion, for we are many.
Ain't nobody trusting no GM. Also, I have a feeling we aren't the best at "preparation".
I don't remember.
Did someone else make a post I missed?
It was a 10/10 experience.
The week before that I picked up our gnome warlock and threw her up an embankment ... she didn't stick the landing and came tumbling back down which set off a trap.
The pee night I also did a sick ninja flip in chainmail armor over some bramble and landed on a cultists head killing him (I get the sickest natty 20s when I do these things). ... trying to climb back over the bramble I got stuck.
Can you define what it would mean for, in the case of this transporter thing, your consciousness to cease and someone else's to be there? Especially in a way that's distinguishable from sleep and whatnot?
I just realized that I don't even think I can do that.
- The Forums Here
- E-mail
- Random things that I intend to get back to reading later. Often just get closed after a few hours when I decide I'm not going to read it after all.
That's (the sleep thing) is how I see teleportation.
Like I'm not consciously aware of when I go to sleep, it's just like BAM I wake up and time has passed. Am I real? If I cut my arm is it a robot arm and the last 33 years are just memory implants?
science...