Basically... here I am downloading my thoughts. One day I'll be gone but all, or most, of the thoughts that I've downloaded will remain. I think it will eventually be possible for all of these digitized thoughts to be uploaded into a new body. Voila! Immortality!
I'm not confident that mind uploading will be perfected before I kick the bucket. One work around would be cryogenics... but I'm not confident that this technology will be perfected any time soon either. Too few of you truly understand that progress is a function of difference! Therefore... Xeroism!
So imagine that you die. A hundred years pass and the technologically is finally advanced enough for all your Nation States posts/thoughts to be uploaded to a new body. To be clear, in this scenario... only your NS posts are uploaded to your new body. How different would your new self be compared to your original self? It's a given that there would be a significant disparity. Now imagine that each and every currently living member of NS was "resurrected". Even though there would be a disparity between our original selves and our new selves... all these disparities would not be exactly the same size! Right?
Maybe the disparity between Galloism's original self and new self would be smaller than the disparity between Alvecia's original self and new self. Why would there be a disparity in their disparities? One "easy" answer is that Galloism has 34,149 posts while Alvecia has 3,535 posts. Quality of posts would of course be another factor. We could define "quality" as the number of new pieces of your identity (ID) puzzle that are contained within a post.
The incredibly advanced computer that uploaded our posts to our new bodies would be able to "read" our posts and correctly determine where the puzzle pieces were supposed to go. For example... "On time, in band camp..." would be placed in your memories and "I hate candy corn" would be placed in your preferences.
Now, as many of you are aware, I strongly believe in the importance of the intensity of our preferences. If all your Facebook likes were uploaded to your new mind... then your new self would certainly know what you like... but you would have no idea how much you like it. In some cases there would be pretty good clues... for example the number of words that you've allocated to discussing a certain topic. But in other cases there wouldn't be any clues... and your new self could end up undervaluing certain things that you like.
Personally, there are quite a few shows/movies on Netflix that I've given 5 stars to. But this really doesn't mean that I equally value them. One way for this disparity in valuations to be readily apparent would be if Netflix allowed its members to earmark their fees to their favorite content. Here's what one's years worth of my earmarking might look like...
If I woke up tomorrow without knowing the intensity of my preferences... would I still be the same person? Nope. Definitely not. So minimizing the disparity between your original self and new self would certainly involve clearly, and digitally, communicating the intensity of your preferences. Here are some ideas along these lines...
Create a digital sector
Replace voting with spending
Allow people to choose where their taxes go (pragmatarianism FAQ)
Facilitate Crowd Sponsored Results
What sparked the idea of Xeroism was the thought that my style of writing is kinda like my mental DNA. How my mind allocates these characters that I'm currently typing reflects how my mind works. Everybody has a unique mind so it's only logical that everybody's writing style will reflect the uniqueness of their mind. A sufficiently advanced computer will be able to reverse engineer your mind by powerfully analyzing every single character allocation decision that you've made. There's no reason that this same method couldn't be used for music that you've written (how you allocate sounds)... photos that you've taken (how you allocate a lens)... pictures that you've drawn/painted (how you allocate colors)... and dances that you've created (how you allocate your body). Of course you can't expect this computer to perfectly recreate you by only analyzing a single sentence that you've written! The more material that the computer has to work with, the more accurate its analysis... and the smaller the disparity between your original self and your new self.
As far as being a religion... Xeroism would certainly require faith! You would have to believe that the technology will exist. The stronger you believe this... the more effort you would put into proselytizing. Would you try and convert everyone though? It seems likely that you'd try and convert the people that you genuinely care about. Yesterday I tried to convert my girlfriend... heh. First I tried the carrot approach (immortality... being together in the "afterlife"... )... and then I tried the fire and brimstone approach. Well... not really because there is no such approach (yet?!). She said that being a vampire isn't a religion. And I think I accused her of being a heathen. She's actually a very non-practicing Catholic.
But maybe you would try and convert everyone though because the more people that pay "tithe"... the more money the "church" would be able to spend on trying to ensure that the necessary technology is developed sooner rather than later. Plus, the church would help ensure that its members were safely archived. The "sermons" would involve motivating and instructing people regarding effective digitization of themselves.
Ok, questions for discussion...
1. Have you ever run across the idea of reverse engineering people based on what they've shared online? I'd be surprised if there wasn't already a sci-fi story based on this concept.
2. Pretend, for the sake of discussion, that you truly believed in Xeroism. What would your strategy be for minimizing the disparity between your original self and your new self? Would you start a blog and write about your most treasured thoughts and memories? Would you use emoticons more often? Would you upload more of the photos that you've taken? Would you try and reinvent yourself? You couldn't reinvent how your mind works.... but there's certainly plenty of details about yourself that you could choose not to digitize.
3. How much of your current self could be removed before you stopped being yourself? According to Heraclitus..."No man ever steps in the same river twice". How do you interpret that? My interpretation is that change is constant... whether we're talking about rivers or people.
4. We have the option to indicate that we don't wish to be resuscitated. Would you want the option to indicate that you don't wish to be reverse engineered?
5. If people always had an accurate backup copy of themselves that could be installed at any time... how would this change their behavior? My guess is that people would be more willing to take certain risks... skydiving... space exploration... jumping on grenades... and so on. This concept was briefly touched on in the book The Origin Mystery by A.G. Riddle and in the show Dark Matter. Does anybody know of other depictions of this concept in books/shows/movies that are at least moderately worthwhile?
I'll leave you with this passage...
There is a vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening that is translated through you into action, and because there is only one of you in all of time, this expression is unique. And if you block it, it will never exist through any other medium and it will be lost. The world will not have it. It is not your business to determine how good it is nor how valuable nor how it compares with other expressions. It is your business to keep it yours clearly and directly, to keep the channel open. You do not even have to believe in yourself or your work. - Martha Graham