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

The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

freethoughtblogs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#51

Post by stormageddon »

jacquesm wrote: post #16
nynx wrote: post #11

Judgement of Aubrey de Grey aside, I constantly find it weird that so many people, even on HN, don’t understand why some would want to live an especially long time.

You might want to live for a very long time, but I don't want you to live for a very long time (beyond your normal life-span, that is). After all, we already have the problem of those that have been around for a bit longer owning pretty much everything that's worth owning and renting it out at a premium to those that are born later. Besides of course the resource consumption problem, the fact that these treatments -…

It does puzzle me that most reactions to these problems are not "let's solve them", it is "I want people to die".

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#52

Post by jacquesm »

stormageddon wrote: post #51
jacquesm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to live for a very long time, but I don't want you to live for a very long time (beyond your normal life-span, that is). After all, we already have the problem of those that have been around for a bit longer owning pretty much everything that's worth owning and renting it out at a premium to those that are born later. Besides of course the resource consumption problem, the fact that these treatments -…

It does puzzle me that most reactions to these problems are not "let's solve them", it is "I want people to die".

Let's have your proposed solutions then given our present day limitations. I'm all ears.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#53

Post by bleachedsleet »

jacquesm wrote: post #52
stormageddon wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does puzzle me that most reactions to these problems are not "let's solve them", it is "I want people to die".

Let's have your proposed solutions then given our present day limitations. I'm all ears.

“Horse shit piling up in the roads is just our way of life. What would you have us do? Stop riding horses? How would we ever get anywhere? If you’re so smart, let’s have your proposed solutions given our present day limitations. I’m all ears.” ~ Someone a century or two before 1914 probably.

Sarcasm and condescension do nothing to drive the conversation forward and really just mask your own ignorance to solving the problem as well. If a solution already existed to the degree that it was common knowledge in public forums then I guess there wouldn’t be a problem would there?

The fact that massive divisions of companies like Alphabet (Calico) are dedicated to solving these problems seems to indicate that not all of us are deathists satisfied to recuse ourselves to mortality on the basis of some flimsy naturalistic fallacy.

Edit: Typo, changed our to are

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#54

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

stormageddon wrote: post #51
jacquesm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to live for a very long time, but I don't want you to live for a very long time (beyond your normal life-span, that is). After all, we already have the problem of those that have been around for a bit longer owning pretty much everything that's worth owning and renting it out at a premium to those that are born later. Besides of course the resource consumption problem, the fact that these treatments -…

It does puzzle me that most reactions to these problems are not "let's solve them", it is "I want people to die".

I have also noticed this. Obviously life extension would create a bunch of problems (wealth accumulation, overpopulation) as well as solving others (short term thinking, cost of medical treatment in old age).

But the vast majority of people in my experience instantly reject it citing some possible problem that might arise, and no further discussion can usually be had with them.

I've come to believe that the subject of mortality just triggers a huge irrational reaction in most people. They don't want to think about it at all.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#55

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

jacquesm wrote: post #49
zajio1am wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Resources are finite, we are already straining our eco-systems to (and beyond) the breaking point. That has simple solution - you could have either life extension or children, but not both.

Are you proposing forced sterilization of people that have received their longevity treatments?

There's a good sci fi novel by Bob Shaw that has this trade off.

"One Million Tomorrows"

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1025074.One_Million_Tomo...

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#56

Post by xiphias2 »

hobofan wrote: post #42

I don't think Aubrey de Grey is a good guy, and for anyone that is seriously interested in longevity research, it is known that he is mostly an old mascot that has kicked off a lot of (public, though not so much scientific) discourse in that field, but he and his foundation hasn't produced much by themselves. Having said all that, the dismissal of longevity(/rejuvenation) research in general by the author (and many o…

One more link that tries to collect current clinical trials: https://www.lifespan.io/road-maps/the-rejuvenation-roadmap/

And an example for success for treating mitochondrial disease: https://www.lifespan.io/road-maps/the-rejuvenation-roadmap/g...

https://www.gensight-biologics.com/product/gs010-for-lhon/

Sure, it's not moving mitochondrial DNA to Nucleus directly, but the vector allows a specific mitochondrial gene to be expressed inside the nucleus. In the future base / prime editing (which didn't exist 10 years ago) can be used to fix mitochondrial DNA damage, which is probably much better solution: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02054-5

So far the car maintainence metaphore of curing aging seems right.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#57

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

jacquesm wrote: post #29
corndoge wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you grandstanding opposition to life extension just to make a statement about capitalism? You really would ditch immortality right off the bat rather than try to solve the wealth inequality in some other way?

No, I've been around long enough to be cynical. Immortality with humanity's present state of ethical development, inequality and resource exhaustion would introduce problems, it would not solve anything.

It would give strong incentives for long term thinking, which would help solve many of the issues we currently face.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#58

Post by jacquesm »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #57
jacquesm wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I've been around long enough to be cynical. Immortality with humanity's present state of ethical development, inequality and resource exhaustion would introduce problems, it would not solve anything.

It would give strong incentives for long term thinking, which would help solve many of the issues we currently face.

Alternative take. The 'haves' would get rid of the have nots because the have nots are the biggest risk to their continued existence. And in one fell stroke also solve all those issues. Why bother will billions when a few million slaves will do?

Seriously though, this is all just wishful thinking, it isn't going to happen. You, like all those before you will die, probably at an age well below 100. And by that time you'll be cynical, old and tired, if you're very lucky not even disease ridden.

The biggest medical breakthrough in the field of life extension was doctors washing their hands and a couple of vaccines.

You want some life extension advice, here it is free of charge: get rid of your car, buy a bicycle. Eat healthy. Go live in the countryside rather than in a city. If you smoke stop doing that. If you drink alcohol, stop doing that.

There, added at least a decade to your life which is more than de Grey will ever do for you.

You're welcome.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#59

Post by jacquesm »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #54
stormageddon wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does puzzle me that most reactions to these problems are not "let's solve them", it is "I want people to die".

I have also noticed this. Obviously life extension would create a bunch of problems (wealth accumulation, overpopulation) as well as solving others (short term thinking, cost of medical treatment in old age). But the vast majority of people in my experience instantly reject it citing some possible problem that might arise, and no further discussion can usually be had with them. I've come to believe that the subject o…

It's very funny to call those that don't believe life extension should or will happen irrational. I think you have your parties mixed up. Thinking about something does not automatically make you rational, nor does thinking that something should happen.

I don't think it is realistic, if for whatever reason it does happen I think we are not ready for it. That's all there is to it.

Re: The success of Aubrey de Grey baffles me

#60

Post by jacquesm »

bleachedsleet wrote: post #53
jacquesm wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's have your proposed solutions then given our present day limitations. I'm all ears.

“Horse shit piling up in the roads is just our way of life. What would you have us do? Stop riding horses? How would we ever get anywhere? If you’re so smart, let’s have your proposed solutions given our present day limitations. I’m all ears.” ~ Someone a century or two before 1914 probably. Sarcasm and condescension do nothing to drive the conversation forward and really just mask your own ignorance to solving the p…

> Someone a century or two before 1914 probably.

Given the degree to which industrialization has gotten us in trouble they may well have had a point. Good luck re-designing all your cities for non-motorized transport once that luxury becomes unaffordable.

Billionaires trying to extend their life-spans is as old as the Pharaos, 'deathists' is a great way to spell 'realist'. You too will die, get used to it and make your peace with it lest you die frustrated and old.

Oh, and don't forget to give your fortune to de Grey, after all, if he can't nobody can, better to have him succeed and then allow you access to life eternal. In fact, everybody should give all their money to de Grey, that will all but guarantee success.

This is how you spell immortality: cancer. The one thing that keeps us in check right now is death. Without that safeguard there would be very little standing between us and eventual total collapse. Right now we still have a chance.

Post reply on HN