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

NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

blog.newlimit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 141 posts

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#81

Post by cheschire »

kiba wrote: post #58
cheschire wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dystopian take on this being that longevity will always be gated, limiting it to the wealthy. They would continue to externalize the actions as being the result of lesser people. The way the wealthy will take responsibility is by taking up the mantle of human zookeeper, restricting lesser people's locations and movements. Just look at where the toll roads are near you, it's already happening. Then the negative ac…

There's a reason we keep coming back to fiction that elevates the obscenely wealthy as being beyond the law, beyond the control of governments, and eventually physically beyond the world in floating cities. There's a reason for that. It makes for entertaining fiction. Why would anyone reads utopian novels anyway? They're boring. It's also a not a good idea to base your model of society on fiction. Fiction is not evid…

Fiction is evidence for trends in cultural thought. I did not say the wealthy will live in the clouds one day in the far future, I implied here and now we as a society produce fiction that dreams that this will be the future. It's indicative of how a subset of people around you actually feel based on their real world experiences.

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#82

Post by cblconfederate »

enumjorge wrote: post #63
cblconfederate wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's very little funding of longevity research apparently. Probably because of people sharing your opinion that stopping aging is selfish/immoral. But this is not right, we've severely underestimated the biological dangers of our overpopulated-overconnected world. We find ourselves needing to fight a pandemic with similar methods as in 1917, because we ve not prepared for that. Biotech should be an imperative for…

So humanity has problems stemming from overpopulation and your take is that we should reduce the rate at which nature makes space for others? Death scares me as much the next person, but I feel like we’re not fully considering the consequences of “curing” it. And call me cynical but IMO it’s naive to think that this technology would be accessible to the average person. If it makes it to market it’s going to cost a sm…

the same concerns have been raised for every technoogy ever

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#83

Post by axiosgunnar »

shafyy wrote: post #3

There is something dystopian, childish, naive, desperate, arrogant, sad and tragic about billionaires founding and funding longevity companies and projects. They think that they've got it all, but deep down there's still this gaping hole of meaninglessness. They can control evertything. Everything but death. If only they can find a way to live longer, maybe even a way to never die of natural causes, everything will b…

Argumentum ad absurdum.

According to this, all of medicine is pointless.

Would you not want grandma's back to hurt a little less?

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#84

Post by libertine »

buran77 wrote: post #73
libertine wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If offered a pill to be restored to youthful longevity in that moment The only enticing thing of that pill would be if you'd retain all your memories and material possessions, because let's say you had to compromise that: - You get a pill but your memory will be wiped; - The cost of the pill would be so high you'd lose all your material possessions; What would be the difference between that and dying?

People would still take the deal because it gives them the hope that they can somehow avoid the biggest, most unavoidable, irreversible unknown: death. And for a billionaire the second choice is a no-brainer. They lose all the material possessions but still have all the knowledge, experiences and relationships that would allow them to easily get back in the saddle. On the other hand for a person living day-to-day try…

You've said it all man.

The value of life seems to only be worth if you've got enough material possessions - else, it's a prison.

How messed up is that?

How fucked up are we that this is even a discussion without the prior discussion about the value of life to begin with.

So, this would only make sense if after you take the pill, your memory is wiped and you're given a random geographical location on earth.

Would be fun to see a billionaire having to make it somewhere in the horn of Africa.

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#85

Post by cblconfederate »

RichardHeart wrote: post #67

I raised $27M for longevity research (SENS.org). Summary of pro death arguments: Fairness Only rich people will get it. (No tech has ever done this.) Better to give money to the poor than science. (family, city, state, nation, has proven local investment beats foreign.) Bad for society Dead people make more room for new, other people. (consider going first.) Run out of resources (live people discover/extract/renew be…

To me, longevity is just a bridge to get us to live long enough to transfer our consciousness to small robots. I'd rather live 1000 years as an solar-powered ion rocket roaming around the nearby stars than as a fragile protein meatpack

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#86

Post by zemvpferreira »

youngtaff wrote: post #61

We know how to make people live longer – provide them with good healthcare from cradle on, reduce pollution, help them out of poverty etc. Biggest problem with people living longer is the costs of supporting them increase dramatically, and who's going to pay these costs? Increasing longevity places a burden on our children, and their children

That's the logic of mass homicide. How many children would you kill now, today, to spare the generation after the burden of taking care of them? Why haven't you killed yourself to spare (y)our children the pollution your existance causes?

Humans are a burden to humans, but we're also humans' best shot at prosperity. Let's not be so quick to deny the upside of living longer, healthier.

(That said I agree with you that up to age 80 or so the recipe for general healthspan is very simple and up to personal responsibility)

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#87

Post by i000 »

RichardHeart wrote: post #67

I raised $27M for longevity research (SENS.org). Summary of pro death arguments: Fairness Only rich people will get it. (No tech has ever done this.) Better to give money to the poor than science. (family, city, state, nation, has proven local investment beats foreign.) Bad for society Dead people make more room for new, other people. (consider going first.) Run out of resources (live people discover/extract/renew be…

I find the way you summarized the discussion unhelpful, because your goal is to present very reasonable critiques to living forever in the most absurd way, and insult those who have those opinions "Man up, save your family, save yourself"? Was it really necessary to insult, among many, the curage of people who may have no fear of dying? I do not even where one would start to debate this.

> More people make more progress faster.

Really? Have you ever seen an urban slum, or an overpopulated rural area?

> Stop having kids

Even if this were a viable solution (history teaches us it is not) dont you think that this wouldnot deprive many from most of the meaningful aspects of their lives?

> If living longer comes with too many disadvantages, we'll know 100 years from now and decide then.

What if longevity causes social changes which are difficult or impossible to reverse? What about those who will suffer the many disadvantages?

> Old people suck.

No, they don't. Whoever makes this argument does not deserver a response. What is true however is that most old people seem to have less flexibility to adapting to change, and with accelerating progress the chasm between the generation widens. The generational conflicts may be very high in the ageless society you envision.

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#88

Post by bachback »

RichardHeart wrote: post #79
bachback wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

richard, do you think a DAO would be better for this than traditional non-for profit organisation? notably newlimit is a for-profit. given the aubrey de grey was ousted from sens in suspicious way after the capital injection, its time to rethink traditional legal entities for this kind of work?

Registered charities get special tax treatment. Tangentially, profit is sustainability.

makes sense. would you consider supporting a longevity DAO effort? mechanisms like onchain treasury to fund projects and voting on those. who knows what the barriers for newlimit will be, but surely one challenge is the traditional legal process.

Re: NewLimit: a company built to extend human healthspan

#90

Post by dzikimarian »

enumjorge wrote: post #70
ericb wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we flip the script and imagine a world where everyone lives healthily, forever, the person advocating that everyone die painfully at 70 seems like a murderous psychopath.

How exactly are you guys imagining that we support a population that lives forever? Earth’s population cannot grow exponentially indefinitely. Where do these people live, what do they do, where does their trash go? It’s not clear whether humans can live on the moon long-term. The more likely solution is that we’ll need to heavily discourage people from having kids. Is that really more humane?

Well, maybe we should focus on expanding outside of the earth too? Population is growing anyways.

Also that seems like a way more rewarding way to spend life, than meaninglessness, risk-less human zoo, that some commenters are trying to sell, while bashing any project more ambitious than just keeping general population warm and cozy.

Post reply on HN