Most of these objections seem to be poor reasons for inaction. Ether it is possible, or it isn't, but we aren't going to find out because people decided not to try.

I started scripting visuals for projecting at parties when I was younger. Later I started scripting L-systems, and even designing L-system scripting languages. Eventually I was helping design a scripting language for the AI in video games, and writing all of the AI scripts.

I started feeling weird referring to it as video game 'artificial intelligence', as it never learned. In fact, concept acquisition is a great way to know if something is truly intelligent or is just emulating intelligence. Cleverbot just never seems to get the inherent structural similarities between sections of 3d fractals like the mandelbox/bulb and Christopher Wren architecture.

Anyway I settled on calling 'AI' from games emulated intelligence instead. It's meant to look intelligent, and not actually be intelligent. To be honest it was much easier to make a functional AI that acted human then I thought it would be... which says nothing about brain-uploading inherently.

Although I can say after years of scripting L-systems, I could visualize the behavior of the AI kinda like a branching result of an L-system script. When I first started making art for projecting at parties, I never thought it would lead to it becoming easy to write video game 'AI' scripts.

I wonder if something as seemingly unrelated makes brain-uploading a much easier task then it seems currently.

Although, even if it isn't possible, if we try and fail we at least know that. The knowledge that it isn't possible could have all kinds of benefits we wouldn't anticipate. Not to mention what we might gain along the way trying.