Sorry about that ridiculous watermark.

  • kaitco@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    4 months ago

    The fact that two Rikers existed is all the proof I need to be full Luddite. Save your death machines for the next person, thanks!

    • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      4 months ago

      And they treat the one on the planet like he’s a copy when he’d logically be the original with the one on the Enterprise being the duplicate.

      • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        4 months ago

        They are both copies. They explain that the guy operating the transporter was losing him, so he used a second beam to try to compensate. On beam made it through, the other bounced off the st uff in the atmosphere that was causing the problem and rematerialized him on the planet. I’m pretty sure this explanation was in the episode in order to establish that both Rikers are equally real.

      • eldavi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        i always felt that it was wrong that they gave the riker that got out a promotion; but wouldn’t do the same thing for the riker that didn’t get out even though he was the one who paid the price for his heroism while the other riker simply got lucky and both did the same thing that earned that promotion.

        • kaitco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well shoot! I’d never thought about that and now I’m mad!

          Give Tom Riker his promotion!

  • Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is why I want monsters Inc style linked door-wormholes. It’s less… Reconstituted flesh.

    Less room for duplicates, more room for halfsies I guess

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      I am neither an emergent property nor atoms, I simply am…

      I personally never took much seriousness in the whole “What if your bed is a death machine!?!” idea

      There’s too much continuity for that to make sense, I mean, I remember most of my dreams, so I can basically account for everything… And many of my dreams are effected by outside stimuli…

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Yeah, the comic’s story and message are beautiful, but the “sleep kills you” argument is poorly thought out, and based on a shallow understanding of what continuity actually means. It’s not about consciousness, it’s about continuity. The processes in the brain that make up your mind don’t stop as soon as you fall asleep.

        There’s an argument to be made about how you’re never the same person that you were even just a moment ago, because you’re constantly changing. That’s also shallow and lazy, and ignores the continuity we’re talking about.

        There’s an argument to be made that from your perspective, continuity isn’t broken. That’s also shallow and lazy, because it treats the perception of continuity as if it’s the same thing as real continuity. As far as your clone is concerned, continuity wasn’t broken. But I was never worried about whether my clone will die when I go in the teleporter, you know?

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            No, we do know that the brain makes the mind. Physical changes to the brain can make predictable changes to the mind, but your thoughts don’t change the structure of your brain.

            • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              While your first point is true, your second is not. It’s actually been found that if you change the way you think about stuff, your brain actually changes. It’s this little thing called neuroplasticity and it’s fucking wild. - https://www.healthline.com/health/rewiring-your-brain

              We’ve also observed intelligence and seeming awareness from things like fungus, which don’t even have brains.

              • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Yeah, I’m aware of that. Vasanas are a related topic. But these are results of physical interactions between neurons in your brain. There’s nothing nonphysical about your mind that creates or alters matter supernaturally. My point stands, the mind is, as far as a naturalistic philosophy is concerned, an emergent property of complex interactions in the brain.

                • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  If my thought moved the neurons as opposed to my neurons making the thought as demonstrated by neuroplasticity, than the brain cannot be the origin.

      • wia@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        There are parts of your sleep that you’re basically unconscious and nearly impossible to wake.

        The dreams could be a whole life being uploaded to your brain, hence the weirdness, until it’s initialized and you wake up.

  • Everyone remembers his irascibility in the film but ignores that, for the three original years, he transported without complaint in nearly every episode. And it was a reliable, proven technology that apparently only got worse and more twitchy a couple of decades later.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      Plenty of folks become more irascible as they age. It’s one thing to do something under orders when you’re young, and quite another thing to do them when you’re retired.

      Also, he would have seen more and more incidents as time went on

    • ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m going through another cycle of binging EVERYTHING. Yes he did transport regularly, but he also certainly complained about it multiple times. Orders are orders in the end. Sometimes the hardest part of keeping a job is bottling up and repressing all those little existential horrors.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think I’ve explained this too many times to do it again, but: teleportation doesn’t have to be “destroy and reconstitute” any more than going through a door necessitates killing you and reconstituting you on the other side of the door. The key is establishing continuity of your mind across the intervening space, which is mostly an engineering problem.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      Star Trek transporters are “destroy and reconstitute” though. They are explicitly described as such. The whole Thomas Riker situation even requires it to be the case.

    • DogWater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think we are still in the realm of a physics problem for teleportation lol

      Fusion is an engineering problem. the sun does it. We’ve done it. We just suck at it.

      Teleporting is not possible as far as we know …unless I missed something huge in science news

      • Waltzy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It’s not all that different to a fax machine, the way it’s described in st.

        You just need to be able to accurately scan and place atoms to achieve the ‘teleportation’ being discussed here.

        Thinking about it even that is probably not possible, as you’d need to know both the position and momentum and state of every sub atomic particle in the body.

        • DogWater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s definitely not because the more you know about an electrons position, the less you know about it’s speed and vice versa.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Heisenberg compensators are Star Trek’s answer to that. It’s physically impossible to do that in the real world, but in Star Trek they’ve figured it out

            • DogWater@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              For sure. I wish they would’ve given that to us instead of the molecule in that movie about the whale. (Sorry I’m not well versed on star trek

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I felt like they hinted in some episodes that there was some rule of nature they were exploiting to get it to work. Like imagine trying to tell someone in the 11th century that humans made machines that can fly, they imagine some mechanical thing flapping wings. They imagine it because they don’t know what air does when it passes over a fast moving surface. It isn’t like the transporter really stores your pattern down to every particle, there was something that they found that made it a lot easier problem to solve.

        • DogWater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah someone mentioned the Heisenberg compensators to me in a different comment and I’m betting that’s what you are referring to.

        • DogWater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          No, unfortunately. the closest we’ve come with that is proving that the universe isn’t locally real. Three physicists just won the nobel prize for proving it. Which is mind boggling in it’s own right

    • blady_blah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      The real problem with all of this is that people can’t get away from the idea of a soul. Something intangible unmeasurable that is really “us” riding around in a meat-robot. It’s hard for people (me included) to realize that the meat packaging is all that we are. If you destroy My body and recreate it, nothing will have been lost. The continuity within the meat computer in my head is all that I am. There is no “me” outside of that… And that’s a really hard concept to accept and internalize.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you destroy My body and recreate it, nothing will have been lost. The continuity within the meat computer in my head is all that I am.

        If you perfectly recreate your body without destroying the original, the original doesn’t start seeing and hearing through the clone. As far as the rest of the world is concerned, there’s no difference between the you that steps into the transporter and the you that steps out of it, but you do actually die when you’re “transported.” You don’t get to see what’s on the other side of the transporter, another being that shares your exact memories does.

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I dunno even if there is no you in a metaphysical sense the deconstruction method still ends your personal subjective experience of being you which sucks. Sure the next you might be just as much you as the first one but you don’t get to be around to enjoy that.

        • blady_blah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I dunno even if there is no you in a metaphysical sense the deconstruction method still ends your personal subjective experience of being you which sucks. Sure the next you might be just as much you as the first one but you don’t get to be around to enjoy that.

          But it doesn’t and that’s the point. You are not the collection of atoms that make up your body, YOU are the software program that is running on your brain-computer. The software program can be transferred (or copied) and you are still you. There is no “you” outside of that software.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Your idea of what constitutes “you” Is wrong. Your subjective experience ends when you get dismantled. We can say this definitively, because when the transporter fails to dismantle the original, they don’t get to see through their copy’s eyes. If they don’t get to see what the transporter clone sees when both are alive, then it stands to reason that if they get dismantled, they still don’t get to see what their clone sees. Their subjective experience ends.

            • blady_blah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I disagree with you, but I don’t know that I can explain it anymore clearly than I already have. There is no metaphysical “you” that exists outside of the software running in your head. You would experience perfect continuity if your body was dismantled and reconstructed. There is no real “you” except the software program that is running on your meat CPU.

              Like I said, this is a hard thing to wrap your head around.

              • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                There is no metaphysical “you” that exists outside of the software running in your head.

                100% agreed.

                You would experience perfect continuity if your body was dismantled and reconstructed.

                I’m going to explain it a different way.

                This is Bill.

                🕺⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜

                I’m going to transport Bill over here.

                ☁️⬜⬜⬜⬜🕺

                That’s still the same Bill, right? There’s continuity?

                Now I’m going to do a Tom Riker, and unsuccessfully transport Bill.

                🕺⬜⬜⬜⬜🕺

                Which one is the real Bill?

                If I’m understanding your argument right, you seem to think both of these are Bill. Which they are, but they’re not the same Bill. Despite both of them subjectively feeling a sense of continuity, only Left Bill has existed for more than a few seconds. If I correct my mistake by shooting Left Bill in the head, his subjective experience of being Bill is over. If I never made the mistake, and successfully dismantled him, the same would occur. For him, continuity is not maintained through the transporter.

                I was never concerned with whether the me that steps out of the transporter experiences continuity. I’m only concerned with whether the me that exists right now does.

                • blady_blah@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  You understand me correctly and correctly predicted my response. Your last paragraph is the interesting part however.

                  Imagine you have an AI. It’s a fully functional self aware AI. Let’s call this software “Bob”. From one instance to the next, this software is just memory and processing inside a computer. It is aware of it’s place in the universe to the same extent we are. Let’s say you pause the CPU. Did you just kill the AI? Of course not. Now lets say you make a perfect copy of the AI on two separate computers in two separate locations. The AI asks me “which one is the ‘real’ me?” My answer is their both the “real you,” but one moment they start processing independently, they’re now two different individuals that deviate from the moment of the copy.

                  Now lets say you change a stick of memory in the original AI, is that the same entity? If you unplug the memory cards and fly them to another location and plug them back in, is that the same entity? If you FTP the entity from California to Germany and install it on another machine, is that the same entity? It’s all the same answer as making a copy.

                  We humans are only the sum of the software in our heads. There is no real us, only the code executing line by line in our biological processor. That’s why there is no “real you” in this discussion, only software, and the person on the other side of the transporter is just as much the real you as the copy that’s destroyed. You are just a self-aware program.

    • aname@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      But the mind does not have continuity. You mind ends and a new copy starts and thinks it has continuity.

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yes? How does that break continuity in your mind? You go “unconscious,” but the chemical reactions that make up your mind are still going

              • aname@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                How can you tell if it is the old mind of a new mind with the memories of the old one?

                • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Because the process of chemical reactions in my brain never stopped. I suppose if, without my knowledge, I was killed and replaced with a clone that has all my memories, there would be no way for me to tell, but the sleeping isn’t what kills me there

                • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  There’s no gap in continuity when I’m asleep. The chemical processes comprising my mind don’t stop. The mind is a process of chemical reactions, regardless of whether it’s conscious at any given time. My mind Is my mind regardless of whether it’s aware of its surroundings at any given time. If the product of the physical interactions between the neurons in my brain.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Putting aside the whole problems with maintaining continuity in a civilization that laughs at all the problems of FTL and relativity why is continuity important?

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I just don’t understand why a gap matters. I had to get knocked out for surgery once and I woke up the same person, sans appendix.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            This is why I hate using the word consciousness in these debates. It’s too ill defined, and isn’t really what I mean anyway. The process of chemical reactions in my brain is my mind, regardless of whether it’s aware of any external stimuli.

            It’s also irrelevant to the discussion about teleportation. Whether or not you’re the same person after you’ve gone to sleep and woken up is debatable, but whether or not the person who steps into the transporter is the person that steps out of a transporter isn’t. Like I’ve said too many times in this thread, if you step into the transporter and it fails to dismantle you when it creates your copy, you and your copy are two distinct individuals. You don’t get to see through your copy’s eyes. So when the one who stepped into the transporter dies, that individual’s subjective experience ends. This is the same whether they die before the copy is made, as the copy is made, or after the copy is made. They never get to see the other side of the transporter.

            For the iteration who came out the other side of the transporter, this is a meaningless distinction. But for the iteration who stepped into the transporter, the distinction is quite literally life and death.

  • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    4 months ago

    I still can’t believe we are this many years out from ebaumsworld and still people are putting fucking watermarks on memes.

    • FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      I get watermarking with your username, or if the platform automatically adds a small one (ifunny), but holy cow this is covering like 1/4 of the text

    • Rev. Layle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      4 months ago

      Hyperion suggests that you do not think about the fact that this is only a digital reconstruction of your original body, which died the first time you respawned. Do NOT think about this!

    • Shampiss@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      Pascal’s wager argues that if there are 2 different and non provable outcomes to a belief, you should believe the one that has better consequences for you.

      In this case there are no divine consequences of being destroyed and reassembled in another location.

      This is probably more of a ship of Theseus question.

      • bigboig@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The point of Pascal’s wager is how non provable beliefs can’t be logically reasoned one way or the other. Like how there is no objective original and duplicate ship of theseus.

        People arguing over the danger of the transporter is a lot like trying to reason any unsolvable paradox, and especially like arguing over having faith. Better than roko’s basilisk, though, that’s pascal’s wager for scuzzy tools.

  • the_beber@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 months ago

    Not only that, but they‘re also literal bombs. Remember E=mc^2? With a technology capable of converting 100% of matter into usable energy, you‘d have a pretty scary bomb bomb.

    • r_thndr@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      And yet, on the list of bomb bombs Star Trek has given us, it’s pretty far down there. I mean, wanna talk about WMDs? Look up Genesis or Generations. Those fuckers are un-nuking stars and collapsing nebulae because why not.

  • Katzastrophe@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    Tbh the same logic can be applied to sleeping. If our consciousness is akin to computer ram and sleep is the brain cleaning up that ram, how can you know that when you wake up you’re still the same person that went to sleep last night?

    • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is a cool thought because it’s not about being copied but more about the Ship of Theseus.

      Why do we sleep?

      “The body needs sleep.”

      No, the body needs rest. Our physical self just needs down time and relaxation and then it’s good to go again. Our BRAIN needs sleep. Specifically, REM sleep to process all the new data that was taken in. Converting short-term memories into long-term memories. Sorting and organizing data. A kind of hard drive defragmentation.

      Our sleep is normally presented like a sine wave. We regain base level consciousness cyclically several times a night, which is why we dream. Which is why our dreams are usually tied to recent memories. The more good sleep we get, the more our brains can deal with recent experiences.

      When we wake up, it’s like rebooting a device after an OS update. It’s us, but with altered software. We are as much the person we were yesterday as the Ship of Theseus is still the Ship of Theseus after having pieces fixed and replaced. The whole is who we are, not the bits that changed.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      how can you know that when you wake up you’re still the same person that went to sleep last night?

      Because you are composed of 99.99999% the exact same molecules. When you transport, you are literally ripped apart and recreated with new molecules at the destination site. That’s how the transporter works. Your bed does not work that way.

    • Bimfred@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Because brain activity doesn’t stop when I’m sleeping, it’s more like the brain is just idling.

      If we wanna go with computer terms, sleeping isn’t shutdown. Sleeping is sitting on the desktop with no active windows. All the background processes don’t stop when you’re just sitting there and admiring your sick wallpaper.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      This is why I don’t like the word “consciousness” in these discussions. It has too many different but similar meanings. Our minds are, as far as we can tell, a property of the interactions between neurons in our brains. Sleep doesn’t stop those interactions, even if we are “unconscious” during sleep.

    • decivex@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Well we are obviously aware of our consciousness and I don’t think mine ‘died’ last night.

  • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    All that could have been avoided by having a drop pod launched to the surface containing a mechanical avatar. The crew member just sits down in a chair to remotely control the avatar using an FTL link for instant control. Of course the avatar has a hologram projector so it looks exactly like the crew member. But that would be too safe and not dramatic enough.

    • ummthatguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      That would make for an interesting story concept. It’d be cool to see the avatar, after exposure to various people occupying their body, begin to form it’s own consciousness with shared traits.

      • Nuggsy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t know why, but I feel like I’ve seen/read something similar to what you proposed… maybe because of ‘The Island’ to a degree?

        I agree though, it would be a fascinating story for sure.

        • ummthatguy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Not quite. The avatar being used is a blank slate, whereas in Dollhouse they added personalities over the existing minds. What you’ve suggested is more akin to what the hirogen did on Voyager.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Something went really wrong with computers after humans for warp. That’s why you can break any evil one by acting crazy or telling it to calculate pi. Also why Data doesn’t just wifi.

    • WldFyre@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s kinda how a piece of technology in Dark Matter works! Not the new show, the one that came out in 2015.