Quite possibly until they are the instance that is about to die. It's all very well to claim that you're fine with the risk, sitting in your nice solid and heavily shielded mainframe on the Moon. It's quite another when you're now in a little wee portable in some robot on Mars, with marginal shielding and altogether shitty safety regulations. You aren't backed up. Someone not unlike you, but from yesterday, gets all your stuff if you die. That sounds like a shit deal to me."Human casualties" doesn't have the same dread if we're talking digital AIs and uploads who believe that recent backups are an adequate solution to instance-lethal incidents.
I think a lot of people think about immortality via backups from the perspective of the backup, not the copy that's going out and dying. Without real-time backup (which is likely to be pretty bandwidth intensive, even assuming it's possible to just hook someone up to a datalink and do this, when you die, you die. Someone else, more or less like you, but with a chunk of missing time, wakes up and takes your place. They are no more actually you than if they were already up and about, your clone including mentally, like in some Star Trek episode.