These people will not be the first biological organisms to be reanimated: that would entail too much risk as a guiny pig.
More probable is that before trying to reanimate any of these Alcor members, the technology of uploading will need to be tested (at least on animals first) to verify the upload conserves the episodic memories of the biological original.
This means time will pass in the interim, and regulations will have time to adapt to such new realities.
An obvious conundrum is the concept of time in law. If you can pause a person's life and then continue it, what about crimes commited before the pause? How does the statute of limitations then apply?
It is entirely foreseeable that legislative bodies will decide it is the subjective experience of time that counts: punishments are of a reformative nature, and a person who did not evolve between his crimes and his apprehension has not reformed.
So yes, in such a future it will be a frequent occurence to accuse the dead, and there should be no shame in that.
So even if a victim of a reanimated person is by then older than a perpetrator of some crime, or if the victim is already dead, it is still in the interest of society to punish and reform the criminal.
People who laugh at the plebs and don't worry about crimes they commit in their quest for immortality (thinking that the ends justify the means, thinking they will have the literally last laugh) may be sourly surprised when they wake up to discover things don't work like that.
You mean "who is according to his own plans temporarily not around to defend himself"
Marving Minsky is probably "chillin" in Alcor, waiting for his mega-upload.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Minsky#Death
These people will not be the first biological organisms to be reanimated: that would entail too much risk as a guiny pig.
More probable is that before trying to reanimate any of these Alcor members, the technology of uploading will need to be tested (at least on animals first) to verify the upload conserves the episodic memories of the biological original.
This means time will pass in the interim, and regulations will have time to adapt to such new realities.
An obvious conundrum is the concept of time in law. If you can pause a person's life and then continue it, what about crimes commited before the pause? How does the statute of limitations then apply?
It is entirely foreseeable that legislative bodies will decide it is the subjective experience of time that counts: punishments are of a reformative nature, and a person who did not evolve between his crimes and his apprehension has not reformed.
So yes, in such a future it will be a frequent occurence to accuse the dead, and there should be no shame in that.
So even if a victim of a reanimated person is by then older than a perpetrator of some crime, or if the victim is already dead, it is still in the interest of society to punish and reform the criminal.
People who laugh at the plebs and don't worry about crimes they commit in their quest for immortality (thinking that the ends justify the means, thinking they will have the literally last laugh) may be sourly surprised when they wake up to discover things don't work like that.