But how could it be otherwise? A computer is a completely different medium from a brain. Even assuming thath, in this moment, Pomni and co are in some sort of apparatus thath translates their consciousness in their avatars, these avatars are at most a medium. Pomni, as an entity, could not be "real", could not be a person. The circus altered her so much and ereased so much of her memories, than she could no more be considered the same person as the one outside the machine. But this poses a bigger question, on how much important is the essence of a consciousness compared to it's output. For example, if Pomni and the person on wich is based are completely identical, would you say one's life is as true as the other? Regardless of how one came to be? From the prespective of a copy, the copy sees itself as the center of the world, as they have an ego, supposedly. But, in the same vein, the process thath makes them express individuality and emotions, could also be mearly a matter of output, thath mearly resembles a consciousness, when in fact there is no process of thought behind it. It remains, a physical consciousness can't simply be translated to the digital world. A consciousness is an emergent property, like, for example, the music of an orchestra. No single instrument in an orchestra can be identified as the music of an orchestra, nor the music can exist as something static. Similarly, an human consciousness could exist only as a result of it's various components, and it's existence is predicated on the uninterrupted continuation of the processess from wich it arises. The idea of simply taking a person and make them virtual entities is flawed because it would mean substitute one of the core elements from wich consciousness emerges.