
Hal Finney being cryopreserved now - mlinksva
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2014-August/082585.html
======
declan
This is sad news, but less sad than a funeral and cremation would have been. I
met Hal in the 1990s via the cypherpunks list, where a young Julian Assange
was also hanging out. Hal went on to work for PGP Corp. in its glory days, and
was involved in the early stages of Bitcoin as well. He is (not was!) the
consummate cypherpunk and extropian.

A lot of those discussions have been lost to time, but here's a note from Hal
that I posted to Politech in 1999 where he warned against building
surveillance backdoors in Internet standards:

[http://seclists.org/politech/1999/Oct/24](http://seclists.org/politech/1999/Oct/24)
"If the IETF sets the precedent of acceding to the wishes of countries like
the US and Europe, it may find itself forced to similarly honor the desires of
less open societies."

And here's Hal responding to one of my Wired articles by pointing out the
absurdity of the MPAA's claims against Napster:

[http://extropians.weidai.com/extropians.1Q01/3833.html](http://extropians.weidai.com/extropians.1Q01/3833.html)
"Looking at it over the history of Napster the amount would have to run well
into the quadrillions. Surely this would be the largest legal claim in
history! I wonder if the record companies can present this figure with a
straight face."

I'll miss Hal. At least there's a very slim, but non-zero, chance he'll log
back on again.

------
FiloSottile
It's fascinating, and personally a bit disturbing, to read about his death as
an announcement of cryopreservation ("being cryopreserved now") instead of the
sad news it is anyway ("died today"). Also the discussion here revolves around
he coming back, not he leaving.

Maybe it impresses me because he seemed so hopeful to be able to choose life
in his post back then when he was diagnosed: "I may even still be able to
write code, and my dream is to contribute to open source software projects
even from within an immobile body. That will be a life very much worth
living."
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1ab/dying_outside/](http://lesswrong.com/lw/1ab/dying_outside/)

I guess one can argue it is a good thing about cryonics, less mourning, more
hope. Anyway, I'd like to write down a regular epitaph:

Hal Finney (May 4, 1956 – August 28, 2014), second PGP developer after
Zimmerman, first Bitcoin recipient, cypherpunk who wrote code.

~~~
pron
> I guess one can argue it is a good thing about cryonics, less mourning, more
> hope.

Not more so than in some other religions with their own versions of an
afterlife. It all depends on your faith.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Well Cryonics is one of the few where the afterlife is back here with the rest
of us. There was an interesting story where these people were revived in the
future but were basically welfare cases without any of the modern implants and
conveniences and no money or credit to get them they were unemployable. Then
there is Woody Allen's "Sleeper" :-)

~~~
rqebmm
you might be thinking of the Transmetropolitan issue "Another Cold Morning"

[http://www.comicvine.com/transmetropolitan-8-another-cold-
mo...](http://www.comicvine.com/transmetropolitan-8-another-cold-
morning/4000-44857/user-reviews/)

~~~
ChuckMcM
Not that exact source but the same theme. Kind of sobering. A friend of mine
is an Alcor member and totally ready to be frozen if he can't upload his mind
into the Internet first.

------
cousin_it
In 2009, he described his experience with ALS in a poignant post titled "Dying
Outside":
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1ab/dying_outside/](http://lesswrong.com/lw/1ab/dying_outside/)
. I'm very sad to see him go.

------
WalterBright
Hal was one year ahead of me, and the next dorm room over at Caltech. Hal was
scary smart - but you had to get to know him for a while before you'd find
that out. He was completely unpretentious, just a regular guy.

And a great person - I never knew anyone who had anything but good things to
say about Hal. It was a privilege to know Hal.

------
rdl
Hal Finney was one of the best people on the cypherpunks list -- wrote
frequently, great developer, involved in some of the most interesting products
of the past 30 years. He was also remarkably friendly and civil, even more
amazing in a place like the cypherpunks list. A really great person, and will
be missed. (but hopefully only for a few decades until the reverse-
cryopreservation thing is worked out...)

------
mef
Interesting that someone would choose to be cryopreserved somewhere where
there's no legal assisted suicide. Wouldn't your chances of being successfully
revived improve if you got cryopreserved while still alive?

~~~
eudox
Active shutdown is certainly preferable, but to the best of my knowledge is
only legal in Switzerland.

~~~
jacquesm
That's not called 'active shutdown', that's called murder. Unless you're very
ill then it is called euthanasia. Why invent new words when we have perfectly
serviceable ones?

~~~
tomjen3
Words have meaning. When we hit the edge of technology those meanings tends to
be obscure or wrong and so we need a new word.

Murder is so final, while this is more akind to shutting down a computer that
you hope to be able to start up again. Hence active shutdown being a more
appropriate idea.

~~~
jacquesm
Until someone is revived we can consider it final.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Well, the whole idea of cryopreservation is that it's a hedge against the
progress of technology. One can't be sure we'll ever get to the required level
of development (in my belief, we will inevitably, if we won't destroy our
civilization beforehand), but it's still better than Just Dying, and - as
opposed to religious afterlife vision - it's clear that restoring a
cryopreserved person is possible in principle.

~~~
jacquesm
In my view it is exactly equivalent to just dying until it has been proven
otherwise.

> it's clear that restoring a cryopreserved person is possible in principle.

Is it?

~~~
TeMPOraL
To quote from Wikipedia, _" A central premise of cryonics is that long-term
memory, personality, and identity are stored in durable cell structures and
patterns within the brain that do not require continuous brain activity to
survive.[13] This premise is generally accepted in medicine; it is known that
under certain conditions the brain can stop functioning and still later
recover with retention of long-term memory."_

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryonics#Neuropreservation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryonics#Neuropreservation)

What we _can do_ today, is preserving the brain structure. What we _can 't do_
today is to restore the brain and body after prolonged preservation, and to
fix whatever illnesses caused the patient to undergo this procedure in the
first place.

Both of those problems seem to be tractable with nanotech, which we know is
real and works (we usually call it "life", but life is nothing but a nanotech
that's not ours and we can't controll well enough yet). So at this point I'd
say cryopreservation is a bet against continued technological progress (which
is not bad, because not taking it means certainly dying), not an act of faith.

One can argue against economics of such, and the cost a cryopreserved person
imposes on the living, but comparing it to faith in God and resurrection is
IMO wrong.

~~~
jacquesm
There are so many assumptions here it might as well be religion:

\- that death does not alter the structure irrepairably

\- that the structure and information contained therein will not degrade over
time

\- that the freezing process itself won't damage the information

\- that the information will be recoverable

\- that we will be able to make sense of such information

\- that the information after successful restoration can be transplanted into
some other medium

\- that this other medium will be able to 'execute' using that information

\- that the electrical component of brain activity once lost can be restored

\- and that all of the above will result in a restoration of consciousness

\- and that this consciousness will somehow be given the status of person
(that's more of a social issue)

All of these together to me are equivalent to or maybe even greater than
believing in God.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Let's go line by line.

\- _that death does not alter the structure irrepairably_

As far as we can tell, if we freeze it quick enough, it won't. No magic
required. (death doesn't mean something magical is happening to matter, it
only means molecular machines stop working the way they should)

\- _that the structure and information contained therein will not degrade over
time_

Possible. Manageable with technology. Testable. No magic required.

\- _that the freezing process itself won 't damage the information_

Possible. Subject to fixing by improved technology. Testable. No magic
required.

\- _that the information will be recoverable_

Possible by definition of solving previous two points. Subject to advanced
enough technology, which cryopreserved people are hedging against. No magic
required.

\- _that we will be able to make sense of such information_

See above.

\- _that the information after successful restoration can be transplanted into
some other medium_

Not required. Technology advanced enough to revive a cryopreserved patient
will likely be able to fix the original medium. Technology already exists (in
form of nanotechnology - viruses, bacteria, proteins, enzymes), but we don't
know how to use it yet, as we didn't build it. No magic required.

\- _that this other medium will be able to 'execute' using that information_

See above. Also, if you really insist on another medium, then it depends on
whether or not brains run on magic. If they are not, then the problem is
addressable with technology (develop a good enough medium).

\- _that the electrical component of brain activity once lost can be restored_

Evidence suggests that this component is mostly irrelevant. Even if, it's
solvable with technology (tough luck to those already preserved though). No
magic required.

\- _and that all of the above will result in a restoration of consciousness_

Unless you believe consciousness is magic, it's possible by definition of
solving #2/#3.

\- _and that this consciousness will somehow be given the status of person
(that 's more of a social issue)_

That's a social issue, but again, if consciousness is not a magical process,
we can hope the society will mature enough to be able to accept revived people
as persons.

> _All of these together to me are equivalent to or maybe even greater than
> believing in God._

Now this IMO does not follow. There're no supernatural phenomena required to
address any assumptions you stated, so isn't this by definition requiring
qualitatively less faith than religion?

~~~
jacquesm
'manageable with technology we do not have' -> magic.

~~~
kdragon
> 'manageable with technology we do not have' -> magic.

Christ, are you for real? Was landing on the moon 'magic' up until the moment
we did it? Why are people like you even on this website?

~~~
jacquesm
You are mistakenly reading 'technology we do not have' as 'things we have not
done with technology we do have'.

Going to the moon was the application of a whole pile of existing technology
and marginally expanding some of that technology in the process.

As for why 'people like me are even on this website', that's a good question,
maybe I should not be here.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I think there's some basic assumption that we disagree on but haven't
identified explicitly yet. In order to try and do that, I want to ask you: do
you disagree with any of the following statements, and if yes, could you tell
where and why?

\- an example of nanotechnology exists and works, it's called "life"

\- this particular technology is in principle able to do the tasks required to
revive a properly cryopreserved person, even though it does not do this now

\- it is real for humans to learn in time how to make this technology do that

\- current preservation techniques store enough information to revive a human
using sufficiently advanced nanotechnology

~~~
jacquesm
(1) obviously, agree.

(2) unknown, unknowable

(3) unknown, unknowable

(4) unknown, knowable but only in a very far future (if at all).

So, in short nanotechnology is just like every other technology, it has laws
and limits and does not automatically allow us to do everything we would like
it to be able to do.

For an analogy: we know that the ribosome + DNA complex creates proteins. But
we are still bound in terms of expression by what cells as a concept are
capable of.

So even if we can _imagine_ life created at will and even if we can _imagine_
all kinds of amazing creatures there is absolutely no way of knowing whether
or not we will ever have the technology to direct things in such a way that
these desires and imaginations will come true. Compared to the suggestion that
we can resurrect a dead person creating a fire breathing dragon out of Condor
and Komodo Varan DNA with some basic chemistry thrown in for pyrotechnics is
childs play.

It is at its heart the difference between science and science fiction.

That's why we will most likely not have a space elevator (we know of no
material strong enough for the filament) and that's why there will never be a
ringworld.

Now for those things we have very clear physical limits that we have
identified and we know that these limits will be for all practical purposes
unsurmountable.

In the case of cryopreservation 'all bets are off', the gap between where our
current understanding is located and the required advances means that we are
essentially postulating that people in the advanced future will _become gods_.

That's a leap too far in my understanding of how human progress has worked to
date.

~~~
TeMPOraL
So if I understand you correctly - you're saying that we don't know today the
constraints of that particular problem, so we can't make a good guess for the
feasibility of (2) and (3). Therefore current culture around cryonics is
vastly overstating the chance of success, to the point that it starts looking
to you like a scam.

I guess the main point of difference is our estimate of how likely is that
those yet unexplored constraints will let us reverse cryopreserving. I seem to
have more hope for that than you do, but I admit, at this point it's probably
a bit of a guesswork.

~~~
jacquesm
You got it perfectly. At some point bets about what is possible in the future
become meaningless and this is _way_ past the ability of science to
extrapolate what will one day be scientifically possible or declared to be
impossible.

Thanks for the exchange, off to bed here (4:39 am...).

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Thanks for the exchange, off to bed here (4:39 am...)._

You're welcome, and thank you as well. Also going to bed (03:49 AM here, and I
was supposed to be coding up my thesis... I guess it's time to turn on the
noprocrast again).

------
ericb
I'm curious--in these cryopreservation arrangements, what is done to
incentivize future people to resurrect you? Anyone know?

~~~
cousin_it
Well, you make a contract and pay money to the company that cryopreserves you.
They could screw you over after you die, but that would be bad for their
reputation and they could be sued.

~~~
maaku
Not to mention that people working at Alcor are also members and believers in
cryonics. They wouldn't screw you over because they wouldn't want anyone
screwing _them_ over when it's their time.

~~~
ericb
Not sure cryo-preservation employees are all "believers."

[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ted-williams-
frozen...](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ted-williams-frozen-head-
batting-practice-cryogenics-lab-book-article-1.381985)

~~~
maaku
The other side of the story:

[http://www.alcor.org/press/response.html](http://www.alcor.org/press/response.html)

(Unless your point was that Larry Johnson isn't a believer, in which case
touche. But he parted with Alcor a long, long time ago.)

------
donohoe
Hey Hal, when you Google all of this and stumble across this old page I hope
you find this note and get in touch for a drink.

I'd love to hear your story!

~~~
harshreality
Google? Is Alcor selling cryopreservation of companies now?

~~~
donohoe
I guess I meant it as a verb :)

------
haakon
:-(

If you haven't read his post "Bitcoin and me", now is a good time.
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0)

------
strlen
Here's an interesting discussion results about near-term studies on inducing
hypothermia was a way to save gun shot victims from brain death:

The article --
[http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129623.000-gunshot-v...](http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129623.000-gunshot-
victims-to-be-suspended-between-life-and-death.html#.U_-QTB9aCpf)

HN discussion with some insightful commentary --
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7477801](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7477801)

------
bryanstrawser
I knew Hal back in the early days of remailing (94-96) where he ran several
remailers and I had one nestled within the hidden confines of Indiana
University (the gondolin remailer).

He will be missed.

------
owenversteeg
Black bar anyone? I think he is very worthy of one.

Either way I just set my topcolor to 000000. Seems it doesn't take hex
triplets.

~~~
shocks
Maybe an ice blue.

------
aerovistae
The thing I don't understand is how circulating cryoprotectant chemicals
through the brain doesn't destroy the tissue. How could anything other than
blood safely circulate through the brain?

~~~
3am
As long as pressure, osmotic balance, pH, etc are in balance then it's not
going to cause cellular trauma per se.

Regardless of the fluid medium, a bigger problem is absence of oxygen is going
to start the process of autolysis after cell death. Neurons are particularly
vulnerable, which how people can become brain dead within 5-10 minutes under
normal circumstances.

The even bigger problem is cellular damage from the freezing process.
Proponents of this sort of thing would say the "cryoprotectant" chemicals
vitrify, so the massive small scale trauma from ice crystal formation is
prevented. I'm not sure anything has ever been reanimated after this process,
nor do I foresee a technology capable of allowing it.

Finally, and maybe the biggest problem, it is hard to see technological cure
for advanced ALS. It is a structure problem with demyelination causing the
symptoms. Even if you could correct the underlying source of myelin cell
death/inflammation, it's very difficult to imagine a restoration process that
results in viable life.

Anyway, probably more than you wanted to hear. This is just kind of sad, and
reminds me this is a young forum on the whole that probably isn't too in tune
with their own mortality (this is not directed at anyone, so I'd prefer nobody
respond personally to it). He is dead, he lived well, there will be nobody
else quite like him.

edit: fyi,
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_substitute](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_substitute)
(though again, this differs because the cryopreserving fluid is selected
because of its properties when freezing)

~~~
reasonattlm
Remyelination cell therapies for ALS are very much a viable work in progress
today. They will exist within the next decade.

[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.04.005](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.04.005)

Some people are working on organ preservation by vitrification and
restoration. Not there yet, but promising work. There is no reason to think
that this is impossible:

[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15094092](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15094092)

As to technologies capable of restoring the cryopreserved, there are any
number of works that propose very detailed descriptions of how it can be done
with molecular nanotechnology.

[http://www.evidencebasedcryonics.org/2009/09/10/revival-
of-c...](http://www.evidencebasedcryonics.org/2009/09/10/revival-of-cryonics-
patients-literature/)

~~~
3am
Upon a quick read, none those are not particularly cause for optimism. By far
the most important one is the organ vitrification (for the impact it could
have on viable transplants) and it wasn't very promising at all.

The ALS article was very far removed from an in vivo therapy and the premise
was hypothetical. Looking at a collection of the links on the reanimation
link, it might as well be molecular nanotechnology. None of them were anything
more than science fiction.

As to the other response (zanny) ... that's your prerogative to believe those,
but I believe they are impossible or outside of the intellectual capability of
humankind (leaning towards the former). In my opinion it's as feasible as
though you'd suggested FTL travel with wormholes.

Regardless, I wouldn't cryopreserve myself even if I could. I've made efforts
to live a good life and accept my mortality.

------
simonebrunozzi
Thanks Hal Finney. You've done some good in the world. Hope to see you alive
again.

------
jdnier
Ancillary to the sad news, for a fictional treatment of cryopreservation
(circa 1993) -- one that I couldn't help think about as I read that
email/release -- Gregory Benford's novel, Chiller, works through many of the
thought-provoking implications.
[http://www.gregorybenford.com/product/chiller/](http://www.gregorybenford.com/product/chiller/)

~~~
geoelectric
Halperin's The First Immortal is damned near a written infomercial for Alcor,
but is still a pretty interesting book in its own right in terms of exploring
various cryonics scenarios.

Edit: looks like it's available freely online:
[http://coins.ha.com/information/tfi.s](http://coins.ha.com/information/tfi.s)

------
ryan-c
I'm surprised nobody has made the point that "death" is not a binary thing -
it is a progression. If we consider a scale where "1" is alive (breathing,
heart beating, higher brain functions working, etc) and "0" is when your brain
has been unambiguously destroyed, we have a probability distribution of
whether a person can be returned to "1".

At one time if someone left "1" (e.g. heart stopped), that was pretty much it.
Now we can often recover someone whose heart has been stopped for several
minutes with little to no long term damage through medical intervention. A
cryonic procedure pushes a person to a place on the scale where the
probability distribution provided by current technology is a big fat zero.
There is some hope that as technology advances that probability distribution
will look favorable to the those frozen. We're pretty much just guessing about
that last part though.

~~~
TeMPOraL
It's good you're raising this point. There's the concept of information-
theoretic death [0] that is the "0" extreme you mentioned.

[0] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-
theoretic_death](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic_death)

~~~
ryan-c
Wikipedia's article on clinical death[0] seems to go into a lot of the
boundaries involved and is worth a read. I have read about information-
theoretic death before but forgotten the term. I first heard about Alcor quite
along time ago (10-15 years), and have considered signing up, but haven't so
far.

As much as I'd love to cheat death I can't get over the feeling that having
myself frozen would be a selfish and arrogant act. I worry that the world will
continue to struggle with limited resources and wonder how people will feel if
the technology to revive cryopreserved people becomes available but it's a
struggle to provide the unambiguously living with food, water and shelter.
That said, I find it difficult to fault those who choose to try to escape
mortality. I would be interested to hear how people justify it from a resource
allocation perspective.

Perhaps we'll figure out how to do mind uploading and solve the problem that
way? That's a whole other rabbit hole though, and there's plenty of potential
for that to suck[1].

0\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_death](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_death)
1\. [http://www.tomscott.com/life/](http://www.tomscott.com/life/)

------
pron
I didn't know Hal Finney, but condolences to his family.

Comparing different religions' various flavors of afterlife is very
interesting, but perhaps this isn't the right forum for it (though maybe it
is; I don't know). One thing is certain, though: cryonics's promise of an
afterlife is definitely the most materially expensive of all religions -- on
average, that is (some Christians spent what probably amounts to more than the
cost of cryopreservation to expunge their sins). It is also the most strictly
transactional since Catholicism prior to the reformation. The burial practice
itself, however, bears a lot of resemblance to ancient Egyptian religion, and
probably some other religions of antiquity.

~~~
jacquesm
It's just a commoditization. Religion will charge what they think they buyer
will be able to afford, cryopreservation companies charge what they think it
should cost to get the problem pushed beyond their own lifetimes.

It's a scam, but a very clever one, just like religion. The only mitigating
factor to me is that the participants here go in eyes wide open rather than
that they are sucked in as defenceless children.

~~~
apsec112
Calling it a "scam" implies that, not only is cryonics hopeless, but that the
cryonicists _agree_ it is hopeless and are just lying to people for money. Do
you have any evidence of that at all?

~~~
jacquesm
I can't prove there never was an elephant in this room either or that God does
not exist.

So I can't prove with 100% certainty that cryonics is a scam. But I'll take
what evidence I have and I'm more than happy to stand by my words.

~~~
MichaelGG
GP asked for evidence, not for proof. Your refutation is a generic argument
you could use on anything. I can only assume you understand this, (judging
from your generally high-quality comments on this site). So I'm curious as to
your reasoning for such a poor response. Is it just that you disagree there's
useful evidence for cryonics and don't want to write more in-depth comments?

~~~
jacquesm
How much more in-depth can it get, I think I've written enough in this thread
already and it seems to me as though the belief in the might of science
outstrips the ability to reason. Science gave us guns and computers, therefore
it will give us resurrection.

And then to ask for evidence is adding to the pile, the _only_ admissible
evidence here would be proof that it is indeed possible. And I don't see any
such evidence, only very small bits and pieces which could _possibly_ one day
be expanded to a whole given unfathomable advances in technology.

The branches of science required to pull this off do not even exist yet.

Remember that old saw about advanced enough technology being indistinguishable
from magic? That's the territory we're in here.

Technology is nuts-and-bolts stuff based on understanding, not modern
variations on Pascal's wager.

Useful evidence for cryonics -> anything that can be used to market cryonics.
Evidence against cryonics: nobody has ever returned from the dead. I realize
that facing death is one of the hardest issues to come to terms with for the
living but I'm a little but surprised how gullible the techies are when it
comes to selling them a bill of goods like this.

I guess at some level everybody wants to live forever and companies like this
handily tap in to that (as did every religion with a commercial aspect since
millenia).

~~~
MichaelGG
No, contradicting evidence would be quite admissible. For instance, showing
that some major part of the structure of the brain decays immediately into
noise would kill the idea of revival. As I understand, there's a bit of
uncertainty, but generally, so far, it seems like it is in theory possible.

>not modern variations on Pascal's wager.

Pascal's wager is bad because it takes the current universe, then lets you
pick from only 2 choices, and the god choice isn't free (as belief in
something you know to be wrong is detrimental). If a superintelligence offered
the wager with the condition that every other religion/afterlife was wrong,
and the only two possibilities were god or no god, and that there was no cost
(just have to say "I believe"), then Pascal's wager wouldn't be a joke.

I agree though that of course this is ripe for commercial exploitation. Just
like an insurance fund that promised to try to get involved/fund every AI
research initiative, in exchange for somehow giving you preferential treatment
in case of a not-so-friendly singularity.

------
morpheous
Sad, and in a way beautiful (I hope that's not an inappropriate word to use),
at the same time. This man lived his life to the full, and faced the end of
his life (as he has known it), with the courage of an adventurer.

I must admit i had never heard of the man himself, although I do know of
bitcoin. But I am humbled by how he is smiling in all of his pictures, despite
his physical body slowly giving up on him; his wife constantly by his side,
through thick and thin.

I get the impression that Hal would have been a genuinely nice man to know.
His life and the way he has faced his challenges head on is (should be) an
inspiration to all.

------
TeMPOraL
Seeing people going all "cryonics is another religion" saddens me in a way.
It's a tragedy that we've learned to accept mortality to the point that as a
species we're not only unwilling to try and fix it, we're calling those few
who try nutcases.

Even if current cryonics won't work, how about focusing on trying to find
another, better way to fix death, instead of throwing the towel and sneering?

------
cowmix
Any time cryogenics comes up I'm reminded of this story from This American
Life:

[http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/354/m...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/354/mistakes-were-made)

------
ogig
In this post[1] Hal Finney writes about ALS and his involvement with bitcoin.
Recommended read: [1]:
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0)

------
dghughes
Funny how the mind plays tricks I read that as cryptopreservation.

~~~
scintill76
Maybe he has been uploaded into the Bitcoin blockchain to be preserved by
virtue of the tens of thousands of independent copies maintained all over the
world. On a more serious note, I expect to see tributes to Hal embedded in the
blockchain.

------
staunch
I'm sad for him that we haven't progressed far enough to treat him. I'm glad
he has a shot in the future.

------
jaekwon
Oh, now I understand mummies.

------
Schwolop
Hal Finney (May 4, 1956 – August 28, 2014 [probably])

------
letstryagain
Hal Finney's ALS Ice Bucket challenge

------
techdragon
So rare to hear about this kind of thing so "present tense"

And is it just me or is it just a little bit funny to hear about an ALS
patient getting frozen cryogenically right as the ice bucket challenge sweeps
the globe... I dare say he's truly taken the ultimate ice bucket challenge!

~~~
GFischer
I didn't know who he was:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_(cypherpunk)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_\(cypherpunk\))

"Hal Finney (May 4, 1956 – August 28, 2014) was a developer for PGP
Corporation, and was the second developer hired after Phil Zimmerman. In his
early career, he is credited as lead developer on several console games"

"In January 2009, Finney was the Bitcoin network's first recipient
transaction."

------
NhanH
On the topic of cryopreservation, to borrow a question from Scott Aaronson
[1]: have you signed up for cryopreservation? And regardless of your answer,
how do you defend yourself against the charge of irrationality?

On one hand, it seems like a different version of Pascal's wager - if you can
afford it, the upside is potentially far more beneficial than the downside. On
the other hand, well, it _is_ crazy...

I can think of one reason for not doing it (personally): I don't necessary
want to live in a society that can perform my revival. Not to say that there's
anything wrong with that society, they would just be so far away from me that
I can't fathom how that would be like.

[1]:
[http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=455](http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=455)

~~~
toomuchtodo
I would argue that cryopreservation is the belief in the increasing rate of
scientific progress (which can measured and proven), and that it is far more
rational than the tens of millions of people who attend church every Saturday
or Sunday in search of salvation for their soul.

As /u/dublinben mentioned, I'd give my entire wealth to have the opportunity
to live in the future.

~~~
raverbashing
On the other hand, you'll be living in the future, and probably unemployable
since things will have evolved so much.

Maybe everybody speaks something else other than English and even
communicating is a pain (even with good translation resources)

You'll know nobody. All the things that you know by "home" are gone.

It'll probably be cool for the first weeks, then an absolute drag.

~~~
zanny
A huge portion of the workforce will be unemployable in our lifetimes:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU)

By the time the technology comes around the revive the cryopreserved, the rest
of technological advancement will change the dynamic of human interaction so
much we cannot estimate what the world will be like, but we can assume that
with technology advanced enough to repair the damage from the freezing
process, you would probably be entering a world of almost any possibility.

~~~
raverbashing
Yes, this video is great, I saw it too

------
amalag
He is legally dead, so good luck bringing him back to life.

~~~
maaku
Yes, because legal definitions impose their validity on the universe.

~~~
Coincoin
I think he was referring to the legal clusterfuck that happens when someone
who is legally dead isn't actually dead.

[http://www.loweringthebar.net/2013/10/no-youre-still-
decease...](http://www.loweringthebar.net/2013/10/no-youre-still-
deceased.html)

[http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/08/feds-say-legally-
dead-...](http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/08/feds-say-legally-dead-is-
slightly-alive.html)

~~~
amalag
No I think they are stupid to try to bring back the dead.

~~~
maaku
Ok I'll feed a troll. You know they are dead, how? I guess once someone is
declared clinically dead, it's a futile effort right? Then how do you explain
this:

[http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/dead-40-minutes-
man/2013/05/1...](http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/dead-40-minutes-
man/2013/05/14/id/504351/)

~~~
amalag
So they are going to resuscitate the fellow after freezing him for 50 years?

~~~
maaku
Yes. The brain undergoes fewer changes during 50 years at liquid N2
temperature than 40 minutes at room temperature. Next question?

~~~
amalag
I only have one question: What is the difference between a dead body and
living body?

