AI Safety

Me, decay

A LessWrong post questions if digital immortality is worth losing yourself

Deep Dive

In a LessWrong post titled 'Me, Decay,' user Dentosal reflects on the philosophical and personal implications of the short story 'Learning To Be Me.' The story imagines replacing one's biological brain with a perfect computer simulation, allowing continued existence without decay. Dentosal, a physicalist who rejects p-zombies, initially finds the idea compelling but quickly identifies flaws. They note that any imperfect approximation—due to computational limits or system untrustworthiness—would cause divergence, potentially creating a separate person. Society, they argue, would proceed anyway for convenience, ignoring these risks.

Dentosal then turns inward, confessing their own bioconservatism and hypocrisy. They dread brain-enhancement implants becoming mainstream, foreseeing subscription fees and ads, yet acknowledge being easily controlled by media themselves. At 28, they feel their prime is past, with neuroplasticity fading and dreams slipping away. They yearn to 'burn down this failure of a human and start again,' but recognize that a replacement wouldn't be them. The post concludes that each second a part of them dies, and preserving only the latest version feels arbitrary. It's a raw meditation on identity, mortality, and the seductive but flawed promise of digital immortality.

Key Points
  • Dentosal critiques the story's assumption that a perfect computer simulation of a brain preserves identity, noting that imperfect approximations create separate persons
  • They foresee societal pressure to adopt brain-enhancement implants, but warn of untrustworthy systems, subscription fees, and ads
  • At 28, Dentosal feels their prime is past, with neuroplasticity declining, and questions the value of preserving only the current self

Why It Matters

Explores deep identity questions as AI and brain-computer interfaces near reality