Upload Your Mind To AI and Live Forever!

We are living in the creepiest times the humanity has ever seen, period. Technology has thrown us into the most uncharted territories, and our decision making is now molded by the powerful AI. The only known species that we're able to reverse its own life cycle and keep on infinitely is the Turritopsis dohrnii, sometimes known as the immortal jellyfish. But invertebrates are not the ones causing us to consider our own death. It is no sort of spiritual epiphany. The real opportunities of artificial intelligence and the great question can technology offer the solution for immortality, therefore allowing us life after death? This is generating some existential crises right now. Scarily, the big question has a yes or sort of answer. Though the technology to come rather quite close to it currently exists, digital eternal life is obviously not the same as physical immortality. Even more frightening is the fact that the first person to encounter digital immortality most likely already was born. Alright, Noel Gallagher most likely had artificial intelligence not in mind when he penned Live Forever. But our current digital footprint might be the secret to keeping present in the life of our loved ones, even after we pass death. Combining our social media posts, Instagram photos, videos, voice recordings and so on, we'll produce an artificial intelligence anthropomorphic cyborg version of ourselves that replicates our subtleties, twists of phrase, facial expressions and so on. Maybe even our actual ideas. Science fiction and fantasy no longer define this as the stuff to dream of. Based on several sources, this is a rather realistic possibility that might start very soon. Those pushing this technological advancement would contend that by creating digital copies or extensions of ourselves, so preserving our history and identity and enabling us to live and interact even long after our physical death. Audio and visual cloning would thus help us to keep this heritage. But the moral questions about the consequences of creating and using these digital clones cannot be disregarded. Such when we die, who exactly owns our digital footprint? How can we control future use of our data? Will we finally have to mention in our wills details about our digital immortality? And and naturally, is it essential to do something only because we can imagine for a moment in 2060, a director dreams of creating a Hollywood blockbuster with Tom Hanks, one of the most venerable actors of all time. The narrative, however, requires a 30 year old Hanks, but the actual actor disappeared many years ago. The answer is just make use of the next best thing. 30 year old digital Tom Hanks driven by artificial intelligence. And that is already under progress. I'm not referring to hologram performances like to abba, Michael Jackson or Tupac. We have already seen several deepfake videos, including Tom Cruise and Morgan Freeman, as well as a remarkably convincing Bruce Willis appear in a Russian advertising for mobile phone carrier Megafon. Late Robin Williams seemed to foresee the approaching problems of artificial intelligence acting legally to fiercely guard his image from being used in media companies. Many more stars might be doing the same. Should any one of us not in the limelight, worry what moral ramifications then follow from digital immortality? Concerned about the future of artificial intelligence are Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak and others quite rightfully, ethical questions persist even as we travel farther into the unknown seas of artificial intelligence. Though it's great to imagine that, like our old friend the immortal jellyfish, we might one day live indefinitely, we have to keep in mind that we are redefining what it means to be human. In addition to using fascinating technology, we have to think about the need of justice and privacy when creating digital copies of ourselves. Who has access to these technologies counts, but so does how and by whom they are applied. After all, only we know how to really portray who we are. It's one thing to sound and look like us. What is to stop others from changing or altering our digital Personas after we are gone without unambiguous laws? When considering our present level of artificial intelligence, the well known comment from Ferris Bueller usually occurs to me, life flows really fast. Look around once in a while, else you might miss it. Though life does fly by, artificial intelligence seems to be moving even faster. Indeed, digital immortality is a fascinating idea, but we might find ourselves with far less control over what happens to our digital selves following death. Unless artificial intelligence slow slows pace soon, and that bothers me greatly as well. Alright, so although our mind is caught in mortal machines formed of flesh, we live in an eternal universe controlled just by physical rules. Specifically, what will we be uploading? First, of course, defining the mind is challenging. Most people agree that your consciousness and intelligence taken together enable you to dream, see, see and imagine. Mind uploading is a theoretical idea whereby our inner experience is replicated and sent to a machine to generate simulation of consciousness. Three presumptions guide this idea. First, your cognition is in line with the biology and architecture of your brain. Physicalism holds that the brain can reveal all there is to know about the mind, so restricting our discussions to natural laws. Second, one day we will have a complete knowledge of the brain and the means to copy all its components, so building a digital clone of the mind. Third, computer programs imply that the mind is something that can be computed as they can regulate your mental state Though it requires a lot of code, there is no physical attribute in the brain, including consciousness, that cannot be sufficiently replicated. Though still hotly debated, scientists and intellectuals put forward these presumptions. Given the several unresolved basic issues, it is challenging to address the topic without triggering emotional reactions. Whatever your view, any debate on mind uploading starts with the brain. Given its most complex known biological construction, the brain merits its own video. The brain consists in roughly 100 billion neurons that interact via a million billion connections, sending hundreds of impulses each second to produce quadrillion events every moment of your life. And it's not only neurons. And each of the billions of supporting and immune cells of various kinds has a particular role. Larger scale the brain is split into sections with particular purposes, ranging from controlling respiration and heartbeat to coordinating movement and involuntary responses. Our memories and skills to plan, think, imagine, hope and dream are found in more evolved areas like the neocortex, or outermost layer of the brain. It is currently uncertain where exactly the U component of the brain is found. Although locations like the precuneus cortex have a significant influence on human awareness. Several areas work together to finish tasks none could have done by themselves. The building components of the brain are very sophisticated. Neurons are more than just information processing transmission wires, having receptors for hundreds of chemical signals. The synapses, which transmit impulses from one neuron to another, are sensitive to outside stimuli. Although our basic understanding of their mechanisms is clear cut and we can somewhat predict their activity on a limited scale, the brain is more than just nerve signals. Additionally crucial are hormones like histamine, which promotes learning, and serotonin, which affects our mood. Furthermore, influencing the brain are other components of our bodies, including gut flora and the neurons in the heart. As we learn more, what looks to be a quite complicated system gets more challenging. We would need a model or scan we could replicate in our virtual world to upload this jumble of cells, meat and molecules onto a computer. Sadly, FMRI scanners and other scanning devices lack advanced capability to attempt this. Still another strategy seems bright. We can create a precise map of all the cells and connections by breaking a brain into small pieces and scanning them under high quality electron microscopes. 2019 saw researchers effectively map a cubic millimeter of a mouse brain the size of a large grain of sand. It it featured 4 kilometers of neural fibers, 1 billion synapses and 100,000 neurones. There are 25,000 components to the brain fragment. Operating continuously for five months. Five electron microscopes captured over 100 million images over three months the images were turned into a 3D model. The final dataset needed 2 million gigabytes of cloud storage. Easily mentioned. Millions of repetitions of the process were would be required to scan a whole human brain. Worse, even we could have to map even smaller building elements like billions of underlying proteins or perhaps individual molecules responsible for all the observed biological activities in order to faithfully replicate the brain. So essentially more data could result from this than from all the combined storage capacity on Earth. Transposing the brain's static design into something active presents the problem primary difficulty. We would still need rules and principles to bring this stationary structure to life, energizing the circuitry with different chemical bonding laws of electrodynamics to generate a dynamic active organism that thinks, sees and acts from one microsecond to the next. Even if we could scan down to the synapse level, actually we have no idea whether it's feasible. We doubt whether our technology could create real brains. The character of the situation determines everything. Do we have a lot of work to do yet it is controllable? Is the brain and mind simply too complicated to understand? Human awareness at least could be more than the total of already unidentified brain areas. This would complicate matters more than we could manage with decent scans. A decent conscience cake cannot be created with a list of ingredients alone. Right now we have clear scientific findings and a strong basis for our final goal. But the road to actual simulation is uncertain and and calls for much imagination and research. People have not been very good historically at projecting the pace of development. At best, it will be enough to finish the work and point out the right responses. Not every cell down to the last atom is something we might need to replicate. Rather, the components might be reduced into probability models, able to replicate brain activity in a more under control manner to upload the human mind. We really do not know how well we should understand our brain and consciousness. Still, science is real and worth looking into. At least. At least we will learn a lot about ourselves and produce several fresh innovations. Mind uploading could be feasible given the fast advancing computer technology of today. Huge, horrible and amazing are the consequences for mankind and our fate in this planet. Functional immortality would follow from a successful mind upload. Your presence could remain as long as a duplicate is preserved somewhere safe and and not erased or destroyed. In fact, your mind could also be contaminated in many different ways. If your scan comes out tainted, you can wind up in relentless pain, paranoia or recurrent psychotic episodes. Whether this synthetic mind is really you begs fresh questions about morality. Right now, we'll Assume the digital mind thinks it's you. What changes in your perspective of life depending on mind uploading? Knowing that death isn't the end would make one feel more safe. Alternatively, would you be more wary trying to prevent passing death before your mind uploaded? Alternatively, would you grow more careless knowing that your thoughts might be uploaded before you die? Mind uploading begs basic problems about our awareness, feeling of identity, and what it is to be human. Would your uploaded self be a copy of your memories and characteristics? Or indeed you? Alternatively, would you start to act more carelessly knowing that your mind could be uploaded before death? Mind uploading begs basic problems about our awareness, feeling of identity, and what it is to be human. Would your uploaded self be really you or merely a copy of your personality and memories? Furthermore, mind uploading has ethical consequences of great extent. Who could use this technology? Will it be only for a small number of people or open to everyone? How will society handle the prospect of always digital life? Regarding the hazards, what a system breakdown might lead to unimaginable suffering, locking the psyche into a state of perpetual agony or lunacy? Mind uploading begs issues about the nature of life and the soul. Should human awareness be digitized? Does this mean the soul is only a complex series of algorithms, or is there something more the code cannot adequately depict? This idea would subvert intellectual and theological traditions. While some would see it as a dangerous overreach and attempt to play God, others could consider it as a method of immortality. The social effects are likewise really profound. A society in which mind uploading is feasible would produce a new kind of inequality between those who can pay to live forever and those who cannot. It might also lead to a loss of what it means to be human when people start to resemble machines, hence possibly losing empathy, compassion, and other qualities unique to us. If people could live endlessly, would relationships lose significance? Would the fear of death would which drives much human ambition and creativity be lessened or eliminated? These are not only speculative queries regarding the far future. As artificial intelligence, neurology and computers advance, mind uploading is growing practical. It invites us to really consider our values in life, what it is to be human, and how we wish to shape our future. Ralph Waldo Emerson had a flash insight on July 13, 1833 on while touring the Jardin des Plantes in Paris's Cabinet of Natural History. Examining the museum's collection butterflies, hunks of amber and marble, carved seashells, he was impressed by the interdependence of nature and human place in it. Along with the Transcendentalists the experience motivated him to write the Uses of Natural History and to express a philosophy that placed naturalism at the core of intellectual life in a technologically chaotic age, therefore guiding him to a new spiritual belief system. Emerson believed that everyone may become a definer and mapmaker of the latitudes and longitudes of our condition, discovering agency, uniqueness and wonder in a mechanized society by scientific study of the natural world. During those years, America was bursting with ideas and everything seemed to be happening quicker. Factories and sugar mills grew like dandelions. Steamships hurried to and from American ports. Trains tore across the continent. The telegraph connected people together like never before. The first image was created, irreversibly altering mankind's view of itself. The country was feeling excitement, anxiety and terror. Emerson's vision in Paris was not a rejection of change, but rather a means of redefining human potential as the earth seemed to spin off its axis. Examining Emerson's response to the scientific reaction. Rebirth of the 19th century will help us to better understand the major technical revolution of the 20th century, that of artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence has long troubled the informational seas we sail in even before its current developments. Early disturbances came from the ranking algorithms that define the modern web. That is the opaque code telling Google which results to show you and that organizes and personalizes your feeds on social platforms like Facebook and Instagram. Instagram by slurping data about you to decide what to spit back out. Imagine the same Internet infrastructure, but with programs that interact with a veneer of authority on any topic. The capacity to create sophisticated original text, audio and video. And the capacity to convincingly impersonate people such that people would not know what is real. Every encounter should help these self teaching artificial intelligence models to get better. Sometimes they create, manipulate and have hallucinations. One cannot predict what or why they will do. Should Google's search engine be the contemporary library of Alexandria? The next artificial intelligence will be volatile profit. Almost every field and industry will benefit from the fast evolving generative artificial intelligence. Alphabet, which owns Google, Amazon, Meta, which owns Facebook and Microsoft are all vying to include artificial intelligence into current products, including including maps, email, social networks and photo software. The technocultural standards and behaviors that have engulfed us across the Internet, smartphone and social web revolutions call for major change. Too many people have let these technologies to pass by them. Correcting current errors would be wise. And we should also foresee and actively shape what the far more radical technologies that are already under development would mean for our lives and how they would transform our society. Society Companies who want to make money from this new technology are already learning the cliches required to discount the rival ideas. Though these are as shallow as they are abstract. They will use appealing language like human enhancement and human centered artificial intelligence. The Internet, the personal computer and the nuclear bomb. What's coming will transcend any technical innovation. In live memory, perhaps the most significant technology of human history. People are usually reluctant to acknowledge a revolution, especially if one is already under progress. They are also quite poor in foreseeing the future. Still, the gap between the arrival of new technologies and the development of standards and norms is usually somewhat small. Stated differently, the Wild west is only temporary. Eventually, the railroad's standardized time arc lamps are replaced with incandescent bulbs and the open web dream dies. In the field of artificial intelligence, the window of influence is still open. Many of those who have labored most to create protections for this new technology, however, are dismayed that the opportunity is practically closed. Like search engines, telephones and trains before it, generative artificial intelligence will allow humans to complete jobs with such amazing efficiency that it will seem magical. Whole types of employment, indeed whole industries, could disappear astonishingly quickly. The utopians among us will see this as an opportunity to assign routine chores to machines, so they may pursue the higher aim of human self actualization. Deeper searches for knowledge, faster routes to scientific discovery, and more time for leisure and family, all of which are increasingly essential to us, may all be accessed with this new magic. As a more competent artificial intelligence looks over our shoulders, it could also lead to a loss of professional confidence and widespread unemployment. By now we should be aware that neither the government's control of new technologies nor self regulation by tech behemoths can keep up with Silicon Valley's capacity to pursue profit and scale at the expense of society and democratic health or the rate of scientific advancement. Starting with an individual, what characterizes the next phase of human existence? We now need a cultural and intellectual revolution. Just as the Industrial Revolution inspired Transcendentalism in the United States and Romanticism in Europe, both of which questioned conformity and valued truth, nature and individualism. This new movement should challenge the limits of what technology can accomplish best and give people above machines top priority, redefining human interactions with environment and technology. Surely artificial intelligence will enable humans to make amazing lives, life saving discoveries. The risk is in giving our humanity to this technology without discipline, particularly when it surpasses us in perception. We need a human renaissance in this age of intelligent machines. With the power of today's tech baron, so concentrated, ordinary people may feel helpless to affect the robots that might soon be Cognitively superior to us all. The face of world changing discovery. Still, articulating ideals has great power, even if they are finally unattainable. Given all that is online, we have to at least try. Transparency should be the guiding concept in the new human interaction of ideas. People should expose anytime an artificial intelligence is present or used in communication. This ground rule could inspire less anonymous web as well as discipline in building more human and human only spaces. Any journalist will tell you that anonymity should only be used in rare cases for the public interest and and as a last resort. Cultural norms requiring people to express not only their ideas but also their actual names would help us. This is also the time to redouble your will to grow closer to others. Though it is a poor substitute for in person contact, especially in cases where creative collaboration or learning is vital. Live video chat can overcome time and distance. The epidemic brought this terrible clarity. Especially when artificial intelligence undermines our sense of what is real. Relationships cannot and should not be kept just in the digital sphere. Tapping the like button is a data point, not a friendship button. And a one sided conversation with an artificial intelligence fosters connectivity. A child might have more AI friends than human ones someday. Not too far off, these friends will be meant to encourage involvement and profit as much as to keep an eye on the people who use them. Such incentives redefine the nature of cooperation. Years of warning about doppelgangers who threaten our humanity by copying a person's likeness have come from fiction writers such Fyodor Dostoevsky, Rod Serling and Jose Saramago. Our new planet is a doorway into the uncanny valley. The first algorithmic revolution used personal data to reorganize the planet for individuals. The second will utilize our personal data not only to split our shared perception of reality, but but also to generate synthetic replicas. The profit driven music studio executive will be thrilled by the prospect of an artificial intelligence generated voice accompanied by AI generated tunes unrelated to a human with intellectual property rights. Writers, musicians and artists should expect and fight large scale imposter campaigns. Therefore, every one of us should do as well. One computer scientist recently told me that she plans to create a secret code word only known to her and her elderly parents. So that should they ever hear her voice on the other end of the phone phone begging for money or assistance, they will know whether it is produced by an AI trained on her publicly available lectures. So sounding exactly like her and scamming them. Elementary school pupils of today are already learning not to think. Everything they come across on a screen is accurate. But they merit a modern technological and informational environment grounded in enlightenment values, including reason and individual autonomy and the peaceful exchange of ideas. Not everything should be documented or shared. One has personal freedom in embracing ephemerality. More personal contacts should take place just between the relevant people. Our humanity depends on our privacy. At last, a more existential component calls for our attention. How far the search of knowledge guides us, either inside or outside. Near future artificial intelligence will improve our our empirical skills. Yet it could also stifle our curiosity. We run the danger of losing our capacity to gaze into the future with real wonder or inventiveness. As we become so enthralled with the synthetic worlds we create, all data sets, duplicates and feedback loops. We should rely less on tools that dull our own aesthetic and intellectual acuity, and more on human originality and creative intuition. Emerson said famously that Isaac Newton used the same wit to weigh the moon. He used to buckle his shoes. Newton, I'll add out, also employed same wit to build a reflecting telescope. The beginnings of a potent technology allowing mankind to peep into the origins of the universe. Emerson's theory spirit is still crucial, though a required exercise on the path to wisdom is viewing the surroundings and absorbing it through our senses. Technology tools can and should be used to assist us in this quest, however, never at the price of seeing, seeing, feeling and finally comprehending for ourselves. Not only is a future in which overconfident machines seem to have the solutions to all of life's great challenges dangerously incorrect, but it also eliminates what makes people human. In a day of hasty decisions, fury, and apparently all knowing artificial intelligence, we should pay more attention to contemplation As a way of life, we should welcome an incomplete state of mind. Constantly question our past opinions, hunt out people we disagree with, and occasionally not know. Being mortal people, we yearn for knowledge beyond what we will or can acquire. Time has the ability to wipe human knowledge whole. Languages vanish and explorers lose their sense of direction across oceans by fixating on the stars. Technology is continuously changing our intellectual capacity. We only have so much time to pursue knowledge, truth and beauty on this planet. And these are what remain. Our own experience cannot be replaced by any book, photo, tv, broadcast, tweet, meme, augmented reality, hologram, artificial intelligence generated blueprint or fever dream. You travel for this reason. You cross the seas, see the sunset, listen to the crickets and note the moon phase. You thereby touch the arm of the person next to you as you laugh. And it is the reason you find wonder in the Jardin des Plantes, which when the universe shows you its hidden code. As we contemplate the fleeting nature of human experience, where time erases memories and even the most profound moments can slip away, we find ourselves driven by the desire to preserve what makes us who we are. This yearning for permanence is fueling the pursuit of technologies that promise to transcend our biological labor limitations. At the heart of this quest lies mind uploading, a concept that could fundamentally alter our relationship with time and existence. By capturing the essence of our consciousness in digital form, we may not only defy the boundaries of life and death, but also create a new paradigm where our experiences and identities are no longer confined to the physical world. First, we have to scan the brain at a high resolution to complete compile pictures of the cross sections, then create a computer model from these images. This model will run on a strong supercomputer, and a digital copy of me will remain contentedly married ever after. This is known as mind uploading and can be somewhat confusing as like what Neuralink is working on. It seems that we must create a high bandwidth connection between the brain and the machines. Actually, though, the objective is to produce a digital model of the brain that is somewhat like the real brain. This technology excites me personally, since it would enable us to not only live indefinitely, but also create and manufacture things without regard for time, therefore freeing us from the limitations of our physical bodies. Of course, one approach many think of as reaching substrate independence and therefore a longer lifespan, is mind uploading. Beyond that, this is really the question that mankind as a whole faces. Our capacity to transcend our current limitations beyond where we have evolved. Living in spaces like space, virtual reality, or other planets, for instance, where humans did not evolve. Being digital instead, then biological clearly has some advantages. In my opinion, though they might not be appealing to everyone. Take some fundamental note of the digital substrate. But first of all, you may readily create backup copies. You can save it as a file, same like with any other program. That is challenging, given a biological brain. Being living entities, we are prone to mistakes. Even if you could halt aging, you might finally run across a bus or whatever. On the other hand, you would lose no more than 24 hours if you just stored a backup copy every day. Starting with physically scanning the brain, we are fascinated in its structural as well as functional aspects. We have to do a really thorough scan, covering all of the neurons and their connections, as well as the momentum that is the pulse frequency. One can approach this from several angles. One of these is FMRI scanning, which uses a strong magnetic field to get finely Detailed pictures of your brain under active state. For medical purposes, FMRI technology is quite useful, but for mind uploading it is not. That great resolution provides the straightforward justification for this. The smallest voxel size on an FMRI at a Tesla level that isn't too high to survive is so rough and big that it just records highly broad brain activity. Nowadays, electron microscopy is somewhat common. Unlike fmri, it is carried out under a powerful microscope that magnifies brain anatomy using electrons instead of light. This year, scientists took a major step by finely detailed scanning an entire mouse brain. Alright. Therefore we are already really good in compiling the relevant data. Evaluating this information and then building a digital model depending on it, presents the main difficulty. This clearly will take some time. For this reason, the startup Nectome is creating technologies meant to preserve human brains. Saving them for the future will help us to scan and upload them once mind uploading technology becomes possible. Right now the whole mind uploading process seems to be rather challenging. So I pondered what if there was a whole fresh approach to achieve it? Suppose there was a shortcut. What if a neural network can learn to duplicate the brain, I.e. deduce the function from all of the outputs? Even without a complete knowledge of the brain, neural networks learn anything precisely this way. They essentially reverse engineer the function based on observations of a lot of output data from a black box. If you had enough of that, like a couple of decades of everything the particular individual did, then you could have a super intelligence looking at all that information and and trying to infer from that what the brain would have been like to produce this data set, even without looking inside the brain. But just looking at the output traces of say a human, the text they have produced, maybe video feed and recordings. But if we could use this for mind uploading to solve the primary modeling barrier, then another group, for instance, is trying to launch a company similar to the well known Nextup Neuro, with an emphasis on using LLMs, long language models and comparable machinery tools to work on whole brain simulation. And that's not incorrect either. That is, in my view, a wise path to investigate as LLMs and other machine learning methods will surely be crucial in enabling neuroscience to become faster, more methodically and better. Evaluating a digital model, possibly with help from artificial intelligence, will prove to be the next big difficulty when we finally arrive at 1. Assume a neural network has been developed in the brain to carry out a function. But a neuroscientist is not sure what that function is. It is just some kind of neuronal activity. The important question Is how you verify what you find incomprehensible. Still, these generative transformer models are quite helpful in filling in missing data, since they know what to do. For instance, if you do an electron microscope scan and discover an area of the tissue where there was noise or something went wrong, it can help to fill in the blanks with most likely presentations. That is rather handy, but depending on the LLM to generate inferred output for a whole brain or draw conclusions becomes dangerous. This is so precisely what you do not want. The LLM has a propensity to eliminate personally unique data features. You want to replicate that particular human brain, not a broader likely human brain. You want that unique human brain. Then raising the temperature will cause this LLM to become more creative, to start to hallucinate. Hallucinate. What it generates might thus not be what you had in mind. Thus, even if this looks like a great shortcut, we are not quite there yet. We have to first define the unique characteristics of the human brain before we may talk about mind uploading. Maybe we can just build digital brains and assume that one consciousness lives inside, not only for our technology, but also for mankind as a whole. This is among the most ancient and important philosophical questions. Understanding the difference between a person and a robot and how they could coexist depends on knowing what the mind is, what generates our consciousness. I think this will be as important a turning point as mind uploading itself. If we eventually solve the challenging issue of awareness, There might, however, another approach to handle this topic. What if we are not obliged to consider if a digital mind is really conscious? Suppose it's sufficient for this digital mind to act as though it were conscious. We are constantly using the so called behaviorist method. When we talk to one another, we overlook whether the other person is really conscious or not. We just assume from their actions that the other person is conscious. With digital minds, we could apply this similar approach. Maybe the tough topic of awareness is not something we should discuss at all. Maybe all we need is for computer minds to act as though they are conscious. Conscious. And this would be plenty to let us label them as aware entities. Should we be able to overcome these obstacles, we would reach digital immortality. Imagine a society in which aging, illness or even death are not causes of concern anymore. We could live forever, travel the cosmos and keep learning, developing and changing. Mind uploading aims ultimately towards this, although it still seems to be science fiction. Technology is developing rapidly and we are getting closer to bring it to pass. Mind uploading is still divisive and many ethical, philosophical and Technical obstacles have to be overcome. Still, I'm sure that with constant study, ingenuity and teamwork, we may realize this ideal. Now consider if it would be possible to watch every neuron in our brains interacting. Track the relationships in real time. That's the wild hypothesis underlying mind uploading. Ultimately, we might be able to move our awareness from our bodies to a synthetic brain. It is a component of the transhumanist movement, which advocates harnessing technology to raise human capacities and perhaps extend our lives. Among the important intellectuals backing it are neuroscientist Randall Cohn, philosopher Nick Bostrom and computer scientist Ray Kurzweil. Mind uploading excites the transhumans greatly. They think it will enable us to live as long as we want and accelerate our minds to run faster than they do right now. The challenge is that simulating the human brain is not an easy coracle. With around 86 billion neurons and trillion of connections, human brains are quite complex in perspective. The Milky Way boasts only roughly 200 billion stars. Currently mapping simpler brains, including fruit flies to scientists plan to achieve the same with mouse brains over the next 10 years. Given that the human brain is 1000 times more complex than that of a mouse, working it out will be quite difficult. Still, given the explosive speed at which technology is developing, mind uploading is probably going to become a reality in the lifespan of our children or grandkids. The difficult problem is that mapping the brain by itself is insufficient. Real time observation of those neurons would be necessary to create a functional brain simulation. The big question then is would consciousness still exist if we could replicate a brain? Most thinkers nowadays agree that our ideas are closely entwined with our physical brains and that we would be able to recreate consciousness as well if we could replicate the structure of the brain in a computer. Still, let's delve further. Should we be able to upload our minds? Would the resulting copy or indeed be you? This has bearing on a well known philosophical conundrum on identity. Some individuals feel you are the same person if you are the same biological creature. Others believe that over time, memories and events link you. Imagine this supposing your uploaded self and your biological self coexisted simultaneously. Who is your? While the upload is merely a mental clone, most people agree that the biological form is still still the actual you. But supposing the only remaining was the upload, you would then be. The scary thing is that many companies are really stretching the bounds of artificial intelligence avatars. Justin Harrison, CEO of you only virtual wants each time someone interacts with their avatars to offer a distinctive experience based on their digital footprints, Messages, recordings, movies, etc. YOV educates these virtual Personas, sometimes called as versonas, to replicate people's personalities. The amazing thing is that a versona doesn't just repeat past knowledge. Its algorithm develops with every conversation, enabling it to retain specifics about the person with whom it is speaking, to keep current with events and debate, films, news, and so forth. It can even start surfing the Internet. The troubling point is that dead people have no say about their own versona. Yov does not call for authorization for construction. Harrison says there are no regulations prohibiting it. Once you message someone, they now own the information and could use it. Though this would have little legal weight. People may perhaps ask not to be digitally revived in their wills. Yov plans to get in touch with actual people whose conversations are being used right now and find find out whether they wish to opt out. Harrison expects, therefore, that in this field there will be many legal gray areas to negotiate. Harrison's first fursona included his own mother, Melody. He simply wanted the gadget to act like her, including sending a million texts if he didn't answer fast enough. He was not bothered with copying her life story. Talking to this fursona has been somewhat consoling for him, not because of her great knowledge, but rather because it sounds like his mother. He intends to have dinner with her once more, utilizing augmented reality someday, and questions where the line is between her real presence and her digital availability. Though imperfect, many find these artificial intelligence bots to be significant. Vlahos created the dad bot and still interacts with it. Sometimes the bot makes.