Programmers can answer all existential questions with ease

        • lugal@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          To my knowledge, yes. The act of cloning is illegal, which means something like creating a clone artificially. The existence of clones isn’t

    • SlopppyEngineer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except with cloning the other twin would be a different age as with current tech the clone is back to being a baby. You’d need rapid growth tech and mind transfer tech to at least make the clone have the same age, memories and personality, although that would most likely introduce other differences.

      • palordrolap@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is at least one case of parents, told at a very early stage that they’re expecting twins, deciding to remove and freeze one of the embryos for later reimplantation, so even with actual identical twins, they can be different ages.

        But yes, transferring minds is not something we can do. I’m not sure it’s something we’ll ever be able to do.

        Should it actually become possible, I assume that certain parties would even advocate for the unique life/lives of the clone(s). The argument would be that the clones’ chance at life shouldn’t be overwritten by other being’s attempts at extension of life.

        “Ethical minefield” doesn’t even begin to cover it!

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They are, on the exact moment they are cloned. On the next attosecond they are not.

    Edit: Well, if they are cloned on the cellular level, otherwise it’s just NO.

  • raubarno@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you fork a process, then it’s the two separate processes but sharing the same memory with copy-on-write mapping.

    • mofongo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is that actually more efficient if I need my child process to do something different with different data?

      • raubarno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s more efficient for memory until you start working with different data. Threads also rely on the same syscall on Linux, clone(2), but they don’t share the entire context by default, so they’re more lightweight. It is recommended to use pthreads(3) API instead of fork(2).

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Also, if you care about Windows, threads are far lighter than processes on that platform. Starting a new process is relatively slow compared to other platforms.

  • jaybone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you just clone a reference to them, then you are just pointing another finger at them.

    Is this really an analogy that resonates with programmers today?

    • Big P@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you clone a reference to someone you have a completey separate body but any actions taken affect the original as well

  • candyman337@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The real answer btw is no, cloned animals aren’t identical to their original, same base traits, but for example in cows spot position will be different

    Also unless you can copy their memories, they just won’t be the same person.

    And then they’d have two different life experiences and would immediately begin to differ.

    • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      And we also change every milisecond. How long this process takes? It may seem irrelevant but copy of you 5 seconds ago is not you now. It’s your restored back up.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unless your pause execution of the original or there’s an ongoing synchronization during the cloning process

        • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sync would lag anyway, I think, if we are pedantic.

          Pausing the execution of the original via execution solves the problem of who’s original here tho. One’s still functioning.

          • theneverfox@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well it depends on the method of sync… Doing it through updates would lag, but what if it was through something like quantum effects, or even by treating both bodies and brains like a contiguous organism until the cloning is complete? Like with a cell dividing, there’s no original

  • theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Huh. Now my confusion about the chicken and the egg debate makes a lot more sense, it seems odd to me that such an easily answered question ended with so much confusion

    I’m now realizing it’s only a debate with non programmers, I thought it was a mutual ADHD communication thing, now I’m realizing maybe it’s just because they learned about inheritance

  • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Imagine if you saw someone who looked exactly like you and mimicked your exact actions, but they were just 3 or 4 feet to the left of you. That’s by reference (I think)

    Contrasting an exact copy of you that can think for itself and has autonomy, which is by value (I think)

    • derfl007@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      By value could be described as, the exact same as you at the time of cloning, but it will be its own object and in no way connected to your actions.

      Whereas by reference would be exactly what you described