Age Reduction Breakthrough? • Hacker News Board

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#421

Post by strofcon » Wed, May 13, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

aea12 wrote: post #96

strofcon wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, current situation sucks massively. Doesn't change the fact that a disproportionate fear of death is exceedingly unhealthy and robs folks of some of the joy of being alive.

Except nobody said, or even suggested, a fear of dying. Only you did. There's a significant difference between wanting more time to do things and sitting around terrified, and conflating the two is problematic. Reading your siblings, you're projecting your own feelings onto a completely reasonable feeling that most people have: with another hundred years of experience, what's possible?

Fair enough, I read fear into the parent comment, my apologies.

As for projection, not so much - I've not really had any significant fear of death, aside from instinct to avoid certain demise. :-)

Instead it's more that I've only ever seen "I'm at peace with the idea of dying" and "desperately clinging to anything that can prolong my life, even if only by a little." Admittedly, that's my anecdotal experience of the people with whom I interact, and I did indeed present a false dichotomy. :-\ Again, my apologies there.

In the proper logical sense, "not wanting to die" is only technically negated as "wanting to die". Quite literally the definition of negation - introducing a "not" in front of whatever the thing is. So that's my oops.

It's a weird place though, because the negation of "at peace with the idea of dying one day" is "NOT at peace" with the same. Which implies fear. Which... I dunno, I've reached my limit now. :-)

Death is a weird concept to consider in a neutral / rational manner, eh?

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#422

Post by gmaster » Wed, May 13, 2020, 4:28 PM UTC

glenstein wrote: post #372

gmaster wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like organisms evolve things such as vision, frontal lobes, etc, we have evolved aging because it ultimately positively impacts the survival of species. This makes it an evolved feature, wouldn't you say?

Are there any good articles or books that make this case in a form that's not a just so story? You're just kind of stipulating that it's beneficial. I think it's more likely that, as many others in this thread have observed, longevity is ignored while evolution optimizes for other things, which I would distinguish from something that specifically evolved like vision. Things can die perfectly well on their own without…

The quantity of a particular species in an ecosystem has an equilibrium point. The optimal amount of a particular species is a number. If there's no death, this number will be pushed out of equilibrium, and the given species isn't dedicating its niche in the ecosystem to the most superior 'version' of itself, therefore not investing the niche resources in the best bet of progressing the species.

This is more than speculation, how is this not beneficial?

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#423

Post by smegma2 » Wed, May 13, 2020, 8:11 PM UTC

mdszy wrote: post #418

smegma2 wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know if someone is being fairly compensated? My stance is that a market is likely to produce more accurate prices than any individual could, but maybe you disagree. It's true that minimum wage is very low, but it should be the job of the government to support people who aren't compensated enough to support themselves.

Okay, we can talk all day about the "should"s but the fact stands that almost everything that has brought any individual to billionaire status in today's world was the result of exploitation.

I don't understand what should be done then. If the government isn't capable of providing that kind of help, then surely it isn't capable of eliminating all billionaires?

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#424

Post by pharke » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

gmaster wrote: post #422

glenstein wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any good articles or books that make this case in a form that's not a just so story? You're just kind of stipulating that it's beneficial. I think it's more likely that, as many others in this thread have observed, longevity is ignored while evolution optimizes for other things, which I would distinguish from something that specifically evolved like vision. Things can die perfectly well on their own without…

The quantity of a particular species in an ecosystem has an equilibrium point. The optimal amount of a particular species is a number. If there's no death, this number will be pushed out of equilibrium, and the given species isn't dedicating its niche in the ecosystem to the most superior 'version' of itself, therefore not investing the niche resources in the best bet of progressing the species. This is more than spe…

Most death in those systems is due to predation though. Just look at what happens when natural predators are removed, the population explodes and then busts due to starvation. If your conjecture was correct then the population would self-regulate by aging and dieing before reaching that point.

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#425

Post by gmaster » Thu, May 14, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

pharke wrote: post #424

gmaster wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quantity of a particular species in an ecosystem has an equilibrium point. The optimal amount of a particular species is a number. If there's no death, this number will be pushed out of equilibrium, and the given species isn't dedicating its niche in the ecosystem to the most superior 'version' of itself, therefore not investing the niche resources in the best bet of progressing the species. This is more than spe…

Most death in those systems is due to predation though. Just look at what happens when natural predators are removed, the population explodes and then busts due to starvation. If your conjecture was correct then the population would self-regulate by aging and dieing before reaching that point.

It would simply take too many genetic changes in a too short period of time to change the aging rate to compensate for such a sudden change in the environment. Remember, genetic adaptation can take years, decades, or even centuries (think lactose intolerance which happens to be 1 gene).

Re: Age Reduction Breakthrough?

#426

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, May 14, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

maxander wrote: post #63

Since it seems like the upshot of all of this is that Katcher is claiming to have discovered a set of signalling molecules which, when injected, rejuvenate tissue and presumably lengthen life, it runs into one of the most fundamental objections that can be leveled at theory of aging (or cure thereof): of the billions of humans that have existed, how is it that none of them have possessed a mutation which (in this cas…

Because, immortal creatures are counter-adaptive. They become a load on their population as they accumulate injuries and disease damage, until they are an ancient hulking parasite on their line?