>>13455528I saw a google doc somewhere (probably linked from lw) which had a bunch of peoples probabilities for various aspects of cryonics succeeding. The joint probability of almost every one was really low. We don't know what will eventually be possible (and I'm crossing my fingers that
>>13455793 is right), but it looks like theres probably a low chance of being resurrected at any point in the future starting with today's cryonics tech. Doing it is better than nothing because it may succeed and failure only means dying, which you would have done otherwise
It would be pretty cool though, if you were dying and knew you were going to die and then you died, saw the lightshow and everything, then woke up with some kind of medical succubus-bot standing over you saying "welcome to the future, fully automated utopian sex socialism has taken over, how do you want me?"
