Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

news.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 120 posts

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#31

Post by ionised »

lm28469 wrote: post #13
guzik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aging is a disease, there should be no doubt in that. What makes aging unique is that it affects 100% of the population.

That's also the only thing that keeps our population in check. Let's see how we handle the incoming retirement issues, that'll give us a good indication (less workers, more retired people pretty much everywhere in the west, peaking in the next few decades). Living long won't help much if it just means more people consuming our limited natural resources and weighting on our social infrastructure. At any rate most coun…

Don't worry, poor people will still age and die.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#32

Post by AstralStorm »

antt wrote: post #30
dtujmer wrote: post #24

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." Well, maybe not the last one, but still an important one. Nick Bostrom has a great story describing the underlying philosophy in the fight against aging: https://nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html And here it is in video form as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY

Imagine a world in which Stalin was still in power. That is what amortality looks like. I can't help but think that this would also completely retard scientific progress. Imagine tenure that lasts a milenium or more. We would still be discussing scholastism.

1) No. Whatever people make, other people can destroy. You could get rid of Stalin any time you wanted, if even by running away or making him irrelevant. With various degrees of difficulty involved.

And for every Stalin, you brought in a few Buddhas and Gandhis.

2) Again, that depends on how you approach innovation which has little to do with age. What would have to be instituted is probably rotation based on tenure, similar to presidency terms. If a professor is still deemed innovative, they can stay in charge.

In fact, such a system would be vastly superior to the current one where once tenured, a professor is almost immovable for many years. It would also help with the publish or perish part if extended to lower levels - you'd get more chances.

Most importantly, if the basic needs are met, you just gained access to a huge pool of genius engineers and scientists by sheer numbers. Imagine if, say, Feynman or Hawking or Knuth or even Leibnitz and Newton were still around, and cooperating... No matter the academic structures.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#33

Post by jamesrcole »

lm28469 wrote: post #13
guzik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aging is a disease, there should be no doubt in that. What makes aging unique is that it affects 100% of the population.

That's also the only thing that keeps our population in check. Let's see how we handle the incoming retirement issues, that'll give us a good indication (less workers, more retired people pretty much everywhere in the west, peaking in the next few decades). Living long won't help much if it just means more people consuming our limited natural resources and weighting on our social infrastructure. At any rate most coun…

> That's also the only thing that keeps our population in check

Thinking longer-term, it's that plus being restricted to a single planet.

Before anyone says being multi-planetary is a pipe dream, it's historically true that what ends up happening in the longer-term tends to always to be something that would have seemed ridiculous and unrealistic at the time.

Of course, there's all sorts of questions here of the practicalities (eg costs) and the timeline (eg life extension could happen well before being multi planetary).

My primary point is only that it's not necessarily true that death will always be the only thing keeping the population in check.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#34

Post by SCHiM »

garmaine wrote: post #21
_iyig wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t it be easier to send an artificial womb and the necessary freeze-dried ingredients on a thousand-year journey to the stars, instead of grown humans who you’d need to keep fed, watered, and happy? The real trick then becomes raising babies entirely through automation. Of course, any automatic system up to the task may be smart enough to just colonize the planet itself.

There will be no thousand year journies. You’d be overtaken by the generation after which left in faster ships and arrived in half the time. Make the trip in a few decades or don’t bother making it at all.

Enter K-level thinking:

What if we did send a ship on a thousand year journey, and learn more about building fast ships than if we hadn't? Such that the second ship we send, would be quicker than the first ship we'd have sent if we waited a few decades?

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#35

Post by Aaargh20318 »

If we can cure aging, then overpopulation will become an even larger problem than it already is. I would propose to only make anti-aging treatments available to people who haven't procreated yet and on condition they get sterilised at the same time.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#36

Post by adrianN »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #35

If we can cure aging, then overpopulation will become an even larger problem than it already is. I would propose to only make anti-aging treatments available to people who haven't procreated yet and on condition they get sterilised at the same time.

Overpopulation right now is not caused by people getting too old, it's caused by people having too many babies. It is also not a problem in countries where anti-aging treatments are likely to be available first and even less of a problem in the rich population that will be able to afford them at first.

On the other hand, the promise of remaining able bodied until you die from an accident might reduce the number of children because you don't have to have children that take care of you when you're too old to take care of yourself.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#37

Post by xorfish »

raugustinus wrote: post #23
winchling wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it may turn out that performing regular maintenance on the human body is the cheapest way to keep it healthy.

I am 100% for a (more) healthy life. I have no interest in 'extending my lifespan' except for the 'few' extra years that the healthy life might bring.

Combating aging will mainly extend your healthy lifespan.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#39

Post by dmortin »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #35

If we can cure aging, then overpopulation will become an even larger problem than it already is. I would propose to only make anti-aging treatments available to people who haven't procreated yet and on condition they get sterilised at the same time.

The rich and powerful would not allow this. They will be the first in line for anti againg treatment, and also they will be the first who can afford this.

So prepare for some very old rich people ruling the planet who will live much longer than the serfs.

Re: Longevity and anti-aging research: ‘Prime time for an impact on the globe’

#40

Post by akvadrako »

raugustinus wrote: post #10

What makes people think we want to have them around any longer? To extend life is to decrease it's value. Simple economics tells us it's inflation. edit: I think Neil deGrasse Tyson says it a lot better than me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3G9LOJZTmM

Related to this:

Elderly Researchers Are a Drain on Publicly Funded Science [ https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2019/03/16/elderly... ]

Post reply on HN