I don't think so. Imagine someone wrote an AI that is able to act exactly like you. To the point that no one you know can differentiate between you and the AI. Would it be OK at that point if they just killed you? No one can tell the difference, right?

The point is, on the outside they look the same, but we don't understand enough about consciousness to possibly know if or how it can be transferred to another system.

>I don't think so. Imagine someone wrote an AI that is able to act exactly like you. To the point that no one you know can differentiate between you and the AI. Would it be OK at that point if they just killed you? No one can tell the difference, right?

Everyone can tell the difference, because there's a dead body. Killing is killing. Doesn't matter that there's another instance living. Also making a clone of me would be a gross violation of my privacy rights. The situation in the previous post - the "transporter" - is different, because I'm agreeing to one of my instances to be killed.

I wonder what would be the legal status of one's own instances ("clones"). I mean, they are all persons, but at the same time they are inherently connected, from DNA to memories.

Ignore the clone part though. That's just how I'm extending the time frame. The same problem exists with a "transporter". The instance coming out the other side appears to be identical, but there's no way to know if that instance is actually a continuation or yourself. Is it the same consciousness/self? Is that even possible to know?

It is just somebody else who knows your passwords, and can convince your bank and spouse that they are you.

It’s not somebody else though - it’s me, they know the exact same things I know, and thus have the same feelings about them.

And of course it’s also their account and their spouse. It’s not like an original and a copy, it’s not even fork, where you still have the parent and child - in this case here all “mes” are equal.

That is how people confuse themselves.

If you have an "identical twin", that also is not you. You started diverging the moment you both existed. Which of you owns the bank account, or is married, is a matter of law, and there is nothing that transfers either.

I don't know why you imagine there is no "original and a copy". You existed before, the copy did not. The copy thinks of itself as you, but isn't. It carries a delusion.

It will start by trying to steal your stuff, so is an adversary.

Yes, we started diverging at “fork” - the other me is different than current me, but we are both the old me. And the legal stuff is indeed down to law, although I believe even from that point of view both “yous” are still you, because there is no way to tell you apart. That’s also why there is no “original” and the copy - of there was a way to tell which is which, you wouldn’t be identical. And there is no delusion - the other me is the “old me” same way I am.

I think the essential problem with this point of view is similar to many words theory - to most people the idea of “cheap fork” sounds quite alien; I’m not sure if there’s anything similar in our usual reality. It is however common in the internets, from Unix to Git.

> Would it be OK at that point if they just killed you? No one can tell the difference, right?

No, because copying has created two individuals, so you're still killing an individual for no reason.

You fork a project on Github, is it ok to delete the original? No. Both will grow separately and slowly diverge / become their own personalities.

Let both live on their own and after a while, if both you and the AI consent to it, merge the brain state back together.

heh that's interesting to think about. Imagine the executioner leaves the room and then comes back. How would they know which version of you to kill?