SkavarSharraddas

If you’re using a password on one site you’re trusting that site to keep that password safe, so that only you can access your account.

If you’re using one password everywhere you’re trusting the weakest site to keep your most important account safe, which is obviously a bad idea.

Your friend is trusting the weakest sites he uses (or used at any point in the past) to keep his password scheme safe. Not quite as obviously bad, but to me it doesn’t seem to be a particularly good idea either.

People had throwed shit at it because of their own specific issues and its “slow” development pace without realizing it’s a titanic endeavour

I think most realize that it is a titanic endeavour and know that it might take years until their issues are solved, so they get angry when people are like “works for me, so everyone should use it now”. I’ve tried Wayland twice, each time it was deemed “ready” by someone, and each time something obvious was broken. x.org works and does what I want, so I’ll continue using that.

I’d call it “implausible deniability”, everyone knows what it was, but people can weasel around and deny it and pretend it meant something / nothing / whatever instead of actually doing something useful.

Even if Musk came out and said it wasn’t a nazi salute I’d have a hard time believing it after he unbanned nazis on twitter, pushed their rhetoric, cozied up to right wing parties… and his face looked more like he was ripping his heart out than giving it to someone. “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

“You” is just a thought pattern, a bit of software if you want to use a crude metaphor. Your body and mind are just the substrate that runs that software. And in principle that same pattern could be run on a computer.

I don’t think biology is that simple, the body influences the mind (e.g. https://www.sciencealert.com/pooping-before-you-exercise-has-an-incredible-effect-on-performance) and isn’t just a vessel for it. But even if it was…

Who says you need physical continuity?

I don’t think putting a copy of your mind somewhere else will transfer your consciousness as well, so it’s not a suitable way to ensure your continued existence (unless you believe in an immaterial soul that’s independent of your physical body).

You could do the slow piecemeal upload process. But again, that scenario is just trying to preserve the illusion of the continuity of consciousness.

No, as mentioned before, it’s the continuity of physical existence, which I believe is crucial to the continued existence of “you”, otherwise even if a copy thinks it is “you”, the original is dead. Which is no use to me, even if a simulacrum continues to exist it would be only for the benefit(?) of others.

I don’t think existence of the original matters unless you postulate the existence of something non-physical like a soul that can transfer over to the familiar copy if the original is destroyed, or split into two when both exist. Physically, a copy is a copy which might feel like “you”, but if the original is destroyed, the original “you” dies.

I think that’s a bad comparison. When you wake up, your consciousness uses the same physical brain as before (conversely, if the brain changes due to e.g injury the “you” might also change). When you “upload” “yourself”, the result is a new brain, there’s no physical continuity (same with sci-fi transporters). Even if the end result is a perfect copy of “you”, I don’t think it is you. Maybe a slow process that adds a computer part to your brain and kills off your biological brain bit by bit so your thought processes slowly migrate to the computer might work. But there are indications that “you” are determined by more parts of your body than just your brain, so even that might result in something other than the original “you” though it is a continuous process.