Notices by Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz), page 178

@popefucker @enkiv2 @natecull ok, but that POV from which you are looking back at your usual POV and saying "that's not actually my POV" is still a POV that *you* experience, in fact, there is nothing else that it could be. As I say, you're not looking at your usual POV as if you were suddenly me, or somebody else. Just another, maybe deeper sense of "you-ness".

@popefucker @enkiv2 @natecull but only from an external POV. From your POV, the clone is not "you", because you are. Unless, as I say, you are staring out of both sets of eyes.

@popefucker @enkiv2 @natecull BTW if you're right in your materialist metaphysical assumption that consciousness can be reduced to the physical constituents of the body that serves as its POV (and I'm not convinced it can), then it's pretty obvious to me that a perfectly identical biological clone *cannot* be "you", while you're still "you, because it cannot be made of the self-same particles you are.

@popefucker @enkiv2 maybe not, but the POV you'll have in two seconds is certainly not going to be my POV, or @natecull 's POV. It's going to be continuous from all your previous POVs. So if your identical clone has a different POV from you, from day 0, in what sense is it meaningful to say that it's "you"? Because it's pretty obvious to me you you, the original that has been cloned is "you" and is the only POV that will ever *feel* like "you", to you.

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 ok, I see where you're coming from. No, I'm not arguing for a "soul" as such. In this context, by consciousness I just mean POV. Your consciousness right now is the POV from inside your body (assuming materialism, as we both are for the sake of this discussion). So let me ask you this. If you created that perfect biological clone of your every subatomic structure, would there now be two POVs, or would the POV that is "you" now be looking out of two sets of eyes?

@lnxw48a1 yes, that's essentially what I'm saying. That would be like a live session or dual-boot for a mobile device. Windows desktops/ laptops were not designed to allow live sessions or dual-boots, yet some clever hackers found ways to make them possible, and then easier to do over time. I'm curious to know of anyone working on anything similar for mobiles.

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2
> I don't think "just a simulation" is substantially different from "an uploaded storm"

The difference is that one is wet, the other one only simulates wetness, but isn't actually wet. However perfect a digital simulation of fluid dynamics might be, you can't put it in a glass and drink it in order to stay alive. At least not unless we invent something resembling #StarTrek replicators.

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 A photograph of you is not you, right? Regardless of how well it captures your likeness, it's just an 'image' of you, it's not you. For the same reason, if you make a biological clone of you, it's not you. Even if it was identical to you down to the last subatomic particle (to the degree that's possible), your consciousness would not start magically looking out of its eyes the moment it start living. Right? I want to make sure we agree on this, before we move on.

@cwebber episode #1 of Libre lounge was pretty good. I would love to subscribe to an edited version, aimed at those of us that don't need all the explanations for noobs (what GitHub is etc), but good that you put those in for people new to the world of things libre. Also, a bit more a formal structure might help, so that you can put up timestamps for each section, and people can jump to the bits that interest them if they're short of time. Overall, great work :)

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 transhumanism proposes doing exactly that but with a disembodied digital clone, with the same fundamental problem

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 that wasn't the whole argument either. There was also the bit about how of you made a perfect clone of yourself, killing you in the process, that clone would be able to function as if they were you, but in no way would that magically make it an "upload" of your consciousness. It would be more like that episode of #BlackMirror where the woman orders an android clone of her dead husband.

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 sure, but if the storm isn't wet from *outside* the simulation, which it can't be using any currently conceivable tech, it's just a simulation, not an "uploaded" storm. Similarly an AI might be a very good simulation of a person's mind, but it's not an uploaded person.

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 I broadly agree with this, but I think the truth of it depends on how "leftist" is defined, which is exactly the point I was making. It no longer has a single, broadly agreed definition. Also I suspect you're describing a US problem that isn't the case everywhere. I heard a talk by Boots Riley where he claimed the US labour movement made a strategic decision to suspend internal class war during WW2, to focus on fighting fascism overseas, and never really recovered.

Then a lot more data could be gathered about the OS support requirement of different devices. Ideally leading to a situation for mobile akin to the desktop, where almost any device, no matter how old or uncommon can run at least some kind of (mostly) #FreeCode OS.

The ability to try live sessions and dual-boot made a huge difference to the average users willingness to try desktop #GNU/Linux. If it didn't work, or was in any way unsatisfactory, the user could be confident their PC would still work under Windows. If there was a way to test custom ROMs for mobile devices, like #Replicant or #LineageOS, without affecting the default system, I suspect a lot more users would be willing to try them.

@natecull @popefucker @enkiv2

When folks try to explain the political history of digital tech through the "left"/"right lense, you get absurd reductionism, like the Adam Curtis doco series All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace. Curtis takes a history of complex struggles over whether tech will be used in service of international networked democracy, or surveillance capitalism, and reduces it all to a shared project o create the latter, unified under "Californian ideology" *facepalm*

@natecull @popefucker @enkiv2 I think 21stC politics goes places that the old "left"/"right" models are no longer fit to describe without ridiculous oversimplification. Take the green movements. I've seen people argue at length about whether they are "left" or "right". It's just more complicated than that. The same is true of tech politics.

@natecull @enkiv2 @popefucker ok, phew, looks like I dodged a bullet there ;-)

@popefucker @natecull @enkiv2 yes to the first two, I guess. I'd like to work for a #PlatformCooperative that offers something worthwhile. Does that count?

@natecull @enkiv2 @popefucker what about technology - capitalism - government + commons + deep democracy? Does that make me a techbro?