Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Teleporting - transport or suicide?

kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 2:50:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Well, firstly, teleportation is actually real and used. Scientists have in fact taken advantage of quantum entanglement and teleported a particle instantly. Google it, it's very interesting.

Secondly, if the information of your body passing between the two points was perfect and not corrupted, then I think you would live and be completely yourself again.

It would be like, for instance, copying yourself completely, and the making your copy walk 1000ft, and then killing your previous self. Same principle. So the likely hood of dying is relatively low.

Though such a thing is currently very possible, the problem is that it would take an average of about 2.6 x 10^42 years to transfer you from one place to another.

That's about 26000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years...it would take a shorter time to walk.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
difference
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:04:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 2:50:53 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Well, firstly, teleportation is actually real and used. Scientists have in fact taken advantage of quantum entanglement and teleported a particle instantly. Google it, it's very interesting.

Secondly, if the information of your body passing between the two points was perfect and not corrupted, then I think you would live and be completely yourself again.

It would be like, for instance, copying yourself completely, and the making your copy walk 1000ft, and then killing your previous self. Same principle. So the likely hood of dying is relatively low.

Or just walking as yourself. Moment to moment movement is as much suicide as teleportation.
Though such a thing is currently very possible, the problem is that it would take an average of about 2.6 x 10^42 years to transfer you from one place to another.

That's about 26000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years...it would take a shorter time to walk.
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:12:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 3:04:49 AM, difference wrote:
At 11/4/2015 2:50:53 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Well, firstly, teleportation is actually real and used. Scientists have in fact taken advantage of quantum entanglement and teleported a particle instantly. Google it, it's very interesting.

Secondly, if the information of your body passing between the two points was perfect and not corrupted, then I think you would live and be completely yourself again.

It would be like, for instance, copying yourself completely, and the making your copy walk 1000ft, and then killing your previous self. Same principle. So the likely hood of dying is relatively low.

Or just walking as yourself. Moment to moment movement is as much suicide as teleportation.

What does that mean?

Though such a thing is currently very possible, the problem is that it would take an average of about 2.6 x 10^42 years to transfer you from one place to another.

That's about 26000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years...it would take a shorter time to walk.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:16:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

I ascribe to Nozick's "closest continuer" theory - the idea that the most similar existent with some kind of causal relationship with the original existent is, then, considered to be that original existent. The answer, of course, depends on how you weight certain factors - to determine which has more similarity, you have to determine the aspects in which it is most important for the existents to be similar in.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:21:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Despite the above, AWSM0055 is clearly unaware of recent breakthroughs in teleportation technology at the University of Nigeria. It seems they have already perfected star-trek style teleportation, and all I have to do is make a small investment for advertising and provide my bank details to become a multi-millionaire.

So star-trek style teleportation will be commonplace very soon. Will you use it?
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:24:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I further note that neither replier has answered the simpe question - would they use a teleporter? It's just yes or no.
difference
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:28:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 3:12:47 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 3:04:49 AM, difference wrote:
At 11/4/2015 2:50:53 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Well, firstly, teleportation is actually real and used. Scientists have in fact taken advantage of quantum entanglement and teleported a particle instantly. Google it, it's very interesting.

Secondly, if the information of your body passing between the two points was perfect and not corrupted, then I think you would live and be completely yourself again.

It would be like, for instance, copying yourself completely, and the making your copy walk 1000ft, and then killing your previous self. Same principle. So the likely hood of dying is relatively low.

Or just walking as yourself. Moment to moment movement is as much suicide as teleportation.

What does that mean?

Though such a thing is currently very possible, the problem is that it would take an average of about 2.6 x 10^42 years to transfer you from one place to another.

That's about 26000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years...it would take a shorter time to walk.

Maybe I misunderstood. I mean that since you are always changing without teleportation anyway, a change in surroundings because of teleportation wouldn't be different than any regular movement you make.
difference
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 3:28:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 3:12:47 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 3:04:49 AM, difference wrote:
At 11/4/2015 2:50:53 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Well, firstly, teleportation is actually real and used. Scientists have in fact taken advantage of quantum entanglement and teleported a particle instantly. Google it, it's very interesting.

Secondly, if the information of your body passing between the two points was perfect and not corrupted, then I think you would live and be completely yourself again.

It would be like, for instance, copying yourself completely, and the making your copy walk 1000ft, and then killing your previous self. Same principle. So the likely hood of dying is relatively low.

Or just walking as yourself. Moment to moment movement is as much suicide as teleportation.

What does that mean?

Though such a thing is currently very possible, the problem is that it would take an average of about 2.6 x 10^42 years to transfer you from one place to another.

That's about 26000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years...it would take a shorter time to walk.

Maybe I misunderstood. I mean that since you are always changing without teleportation anyway, a change in surroundings because of teleportation wouldn't be different than any regular movement you make.
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 6:28:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 3:21:59 AM, kp98 wrote:
Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously!

Despite the above, AWSM0055 is clearly unaware of recent breakthroughs in teleportation technology at the University of Nigeria. It seems they have already perfected star-trek style teleportation, and all I have to do is make a small investment for advertising and provide my bank details to become a multi-millionaire.

So star-trek style teleportation will be commonplace very soon. Will you use it?

I thought it would be interesting if I posted some facts about it and such. You clearly didn't want that so I apologise.

But in answer to your question: maybe. It depends on how safe and reliable it is.

If it had been tried and tested with good results, then hell yeah!

If it just been developed without testing...no...
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 10:38:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'd be more than happy to talk about real teleporting on the science forum if you want to do that, awsome. Trouble with real science is there is nothing to discuss - except to say 'wow' and pass on links to articles.

But philosophically I've found Star-Trek teleporting a good way to expore the concept of 'self'. I've had some good argument about whether teleporting is ok or not!

So your trip to london went wrong and you were left in Boston while a copy of you was in London, what would you think? Would you be happy about paying your copy's hotel bill? If not, why would you happily pay it if you had been atomised in Boston?
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2015 11:01:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Real teleportation, performed on the subatomic level, does not involve cutting and pasting the teleported object. It instead utilizes quantum tunneling, whereby a particle "tunnels" from one place to another without passing through the space that separates them. Basically, the particle decides to shortcut the relocation process, and can do this because it's actually a wave. It's far more complicated than that, but I'll get it wrong if I try to explain it. Regardless, your thought experiment is unnecessary.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2015 9:14:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Regardless, your thought experiment is unnecessary.

Ah, but what is 'neccessary' in this nihilistic world?

The point of the experiment is not the technology involved or the science of quantum entanglement (or I'd have posted on the science board) but to explore the issue of 'who we are', what 'personal identity' really means. It might even be about 'soul' - would a star-trek teleporter teleport the soul along with atoms or would it be left behind? Is teleported Kirl still Kirk or a new individual?

It isn't necessary to investigate what it means to be a person, that is an individual distinct from any other person, what constitutes 'I', but I think it's worth talking about....

Or I suppose we could have another thread about evolution, or whether god exists.
edgar_winters
Posts: 49
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2015 11:16:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/4/2015 1:37:38 AM, kp98 wrote:
Is teleporting a mode of transport or a method of suicide?

It is generally portrayed in science fiction as the former, but as it involves replacing a person in one place with a clone somewhere else, using a teleport for (say) a holiday in London would mean killing yourself so a newly-minted stranger gets to see the sights. That is clearly brought home by imaging the situation if by accident the original (ie you) was not destroyed in the process. In that case you'd still be in your home town of New York or Sidney - so who is it in London?

Even so, I would happily use a teleporter, but in my experience many people go off the idea when the killing-and-cloning aspect is pointed out to them.

So if teleporting was easily available (and 'safe') would you use it? What does teleporting say about 'personal identity'?

Note - it's a thought experiment so the probable technical unfeasibility can be taken as read and not taken too seriously! : :

They don't understand what true teleporting means. Our Creator has planned to put his created people into many different bodies in many different dream experiences in the next generation. If you can understand that our true created existence is only information, then you can understand how that information can be transformed into any visible body and experience.
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2015 11:25:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/5/2015 9:14:08 AM, kp98 wrote:
Regardless, your thought experiment is unnecessary.

Ah, but what is 'neccessary' in this nihilistic world?

The point of the experiment is not the technology involved or the science of quantum entanglement (or I'd have posted on the science board) but to explore the issue of 'who we are', what 'personal identity' really means. It might even be about 'soul' - would a star-trek teleporter teleport the soul along with atoms or would it be left behind? Is teleported Kirl still Kirk or a new individual?

It isn't necessary to investigate what it means to be a person, that is an individual distinct from any other person, what constitutes 'I', but I think it's worth talking about....

Or I suppose we could have another thread about evolution, or whether god exists.

1) Use the quote function. That way, I get a notification that you've replied.

2) Since the entirety of who we are is contained within our brain, an immaterial soul is redundant.

3) If you created a perfect duplicate of Kirk, that would have no effect on the old one. The original Kirk would still be Kirk. If you destroyed the original Kirk, then you'd just be left with the duplicate. From Kirk's perspective, the teleporter is nothing but a vaporization ray.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 7:42:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
: 3) If you created a perfect duplicate of Kirk, that would have no effect on the old one. The original Kirk would still be Kirk. If you destroyed the original Kirk, then you'd just be left with the duplicate. From Kirk's perspective, the teleporter is nothing but a vaporization ray.

From which I conclude you would not use a teleporter?
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 9:09:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/6/2015 7:42:13 AM, kp98 wrote:
: 3) If you created a perfect duplicate of Kirk, that would have no effect on the old one. The original Kirk would still be Kirk. If you destroyed the original Kirk, then you'd just be left with the duplicate. From Kirk's perspective, the teleporter is nothing but a vaporization ray.

From which I conclude you would not use a teleporter?

Not one that vaporizes people, because that's just dumb.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 9:18:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Not one that vaporizes people, because that's just dumb.

I think that vaporisation is implicit - certainly its not ruled out from what I remember about star trek.

Nonetheless, I note that AWSM005 is all for it:
If it had been tried and tested with good results, then hell yeah!

I wonder if he has changed his mind?
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 9:51:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/6/2015 9:18:45 AM, kp98 wrote:
Not one that vaporizes people, because that's just dumb.

I think that vaporisation is implicit - certainly its not ruled out from what I remember about star trek.

Star Trek is fiction. Quantum tunneling is not. The latter is a better model for teleportation.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 10:29:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I can live with that! If a teleport using quantum tunnelling was constructed and I went in it, would what came out still be me?
chui
Posts: 507
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 10:50:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/6/2015 9:51:25 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/6/2015 9:18:45 AM, kp98 wrote:
Not one that vaporizes people, because that's just dumb.

I think that vaporisation is implicit - certainly its not ruled out from what I remember about star trek.

Star Trek is fiction. Quantum tunneling is not. The latter is a better model for teleportation.

Quantum tunneling works over very short distances (a few atomic diameters) and is not how quantum teleportation works. Even if it were, we cannot assume the particles that emerged at the end of the 'tunnel' are the same as the ones that entered. The person leaving the teleporter is a new body with the information from the old body.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 10:54:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
You seem to be avoiding answering my simple question - is 'a new body with the information from the old body' still me or not? It's a simple yes or no, isn't it?
chui
Posts: 507
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 11:50:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/6/2015 10:54:31 AM, kp98 wrote:
You seem to be avoiding answering my simple question - is 'a new body with the information from the old body' still me or not? It's a simple yes or no, isn't it?

My gut instinct is no it is not me.

However if I had been teleported with all my memories etc. intact I would think I am still me.

The body I am in now is not likely to be made of the same atoms that it had when I was born but I am happy to say I am still me. So am I just information?

If all this information could be saved to a computer and then put into a clone of me after the first me died, have I been resurrected or copied? could we achieve real immortality in this way?

I heard an analogy to this puzzle. Perhaps you know it: I sail in a boat and periodically I replace a piece of the boat and throw it overboard. Someone else follows me and collects the discarded debris and makes a complete boat eventually that is identical to the first. Which is the original boat, the one I am still in or the one made of the original material?

I think this says that an object is two things: the materials it is made of and the way those materials are put together. Basically stuff and information. So your question about self boils down to "are we stuff or are we information or are we both?". If I claim that I am stuff then every time I lose or gain stuff am I no longer me? If I am information I can lose or gain information so perhaps I am not me. Maybe self is an illusion?
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 9:20:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/6/2015 10:50:47 AM, chui wrote:
At 11/6/2015 9:51:25 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/6/2015 9:18:45 AM, kp98 wrote:
Not one that vaporizes people, because that's just dumb.

I think that vaporisation is implicit - certainly its not ruled out from what I remember about star trek.

Star Trek is fiction. Quantum tunneling is not. The latter is a better model for teleportation.

Quantum tunneling works over very short distances (a few atomic diameters) and is not how quantum teleportation works.

You're right. I got the two concepts confused. Teleportation involves entanglement.

Even if it were, we cannot assume the particles that emerged at the end of the 'tunnel' are the same as the ones that entered. The person leaving the teleporter is a new body with the information from the old body.

The difference being that two electrons are identical, and are thus indistinguishable when entangled. Humans, being more complex, would not follow this rule. However, as we've established, I'm not qualified to speculate on the scientific ramifications of this subject.

Regardless, any teleportation technology must be proven safe before it can be used. Vaporization is not. Quantum stuff, maybe. Science probably will have debunked this thought experiment before we ever build teleporters.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2015 9:45:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"are we stuff or are we information or are we both?"

Indeed that is the question! Of course it doesn't matter now, because your 'stuff' and your 'information' are inextricably bound together. Its only if they invent teleporting or 'mind uploading' that these problems become pressing - but its good to be prepared!

One way to explore the question of what we are would be to consider being forced to choose between two slightly faulty teleporters. One reproduces a perfect copy of your body but with a changed personality, the other introduces a small change to your body but faithfully reproduces your personality. Which would you choose, if 'neither' wasn't an option?

I think that - as long as the change was relatively negligible - I would go for preserving my personality rather than my body. Not that my personality is all that great or that my body couldn't do with some changes, but I feel what is that makes me, well, me are my thoughts, or my way of thinking. A me who, say, didn't like old black and white movies wouldn't be me anymore. A slightly changed body would not make me feel I wasn't me to anything like the same extent. If I got an artificial arm or leg, I'd still feel I was me, so a negligible pysical change wrought in the teleporter should be no problem.

On that basis, I'd defintely say we were 'information', not 'stuff'.