<p>Well, when I made the other thread, I had two ideas. This is the second. Same situation, in that your choice will ultimately mean life or death. There is no status quo option.</p>
<p>Option #1: You live for the next twenty years. Whether you would have lived for one day or one century, it now becomes twenty years. You will have the ability to travel the world. You will be completely free. Unless you commit a grave crime, you will not be imprisoned. After twenty years of freedom and traveling the Earth, you will die. You may believe whatever you like about what happens after death; hopefully it is something pleasant.</p>
<p>Option #2: You are confined to a 20'x20' room. You will always have food and water, and you have a supply of entertainment sources (books, movies, music, whatever), limited by what can fit in the room. There is a bed, a desk (with infinite writing materials), a table, chairs, and some other furniture. You must never leave this room; however, you will live forever. You become biologically immortal, and so will never age past your prime. You will not be harmed, though it is possible for you to intentionally harm yourself. Assuming you do not commit suicide, you will live forever. Life eternal is yours, time is yours, but not freedom.</p>
<p>So which do you choose? Risk the secession of consciousness and destruction of your thoughts, or be forever trapped, but forever alive? Perhaps immortality sounds nice now, but it will be a torment 2,000 years hence. Perhaps not. Who knows.</p>
<p>Easy choice - option 1. Even though I could commit suicide with option 2, I’d much rather be totally free for 20 years than trapped for as long as I can stand it. Plus, I’d probably commit suicide before 20 years with option 2.</p>
Sure, for as long as wireless internet exists. You have the potential to outlive mankind. And certainly modern technology. No new items (besides food and water) will be added to the room, though, so Wi-Fi won’t be good for too long.</p>
I thought you would have an endless supply of new entertainment, though, and that was the point. Otherwise anyone would commit suicide within the year, maybe even within a month or two.</p>
<p>Okay, fair enough. Endless supply of new entertainment. You can’t leave, and no new people can enter, but you can have pretty much anything else, short of total immersion virtual reality.</p>
<p>Option 2 sounds great, and honestly 20 years is enough time for me to live out a farr better life than someone who’s confined to a room for eternity.</p>
<p>Immortality sounds scary to me. It’s unnatural and an endless supply of entertainment will hardly be enough to compensate for the touch of the living. </p>
<p>On the other hand, twenty years is more than enough time to try out every little fancy that I have. </p>
<p>^You sound like an engineer to me. A total disinterest in human interaction is not sustainable, and option two definitely limits your freedom to interact. Entertaining oneself with physical objects is only so rewarding for so long.</p>
<p>Indeed, a total disinterest in human interaction is not sustainable, nor is a 20-year countdown to your death. The transience of either option is fairly evident.</p>