A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth • Hacker News Board

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#101

Post by dcow » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:11 PM UTC

hungryforcodes wrote: post #100

dcow wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we were to immediately acquire immortality then society would need to evolve a structure that deliberately kills ideas and pushes itself past ideologic ruts, etc. Do you really want boomers running government and owning land for longer ? Society would be down right miserable. Think about it in terms other than “yourself transcending all your peers” for a moment. It may sound cool to you to live to see the day we c…

This a dumb argument. Steve Jobs was a boomer and created the reality we live in today. He definitely wasn't lacking for any innovation or ideas.

I like the Apple Pencil.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#102

Post by snek_case » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:13 PM UTC

Jack000 wrote: post #59

Trying to fix aging for existing humans is like trying to patch a binary that's already running, it would be way easier to build new humans with better source code imo.

I agree. There is no secret magic cure to aging. There's never going to be a pill that makes you younger. The reason the human body ages is that it's a lot easier to build a new human from scratch than it is to repair damaged cells, damaged tissue, etc. Nature doesn't know how to do that effectively, at least not for complex life forms as large as human beings.

Ultimately, I think that if we want to extend life indefinitely, we'll need a strategy that involves replacing organs, replacing brain tissue, and maybe replacing most of the human body. You might be able to boost someone's life span by a few years with stem cells and such, but that's just patching the binary like you said. It's like repairing a home. You can patch drywall, but eventually, to fix a very old house, you might have to rip everything open and replace most of the materials. At some point it's easier to rebuild parts of the house than to keep patching.

IMO, we should be harnessing the fact that nature is very good at growing new healthy tissue. There has to be a way to coax stem cells into growing a new heart, a new liver, or a new arm. We ought to figure out how to do that. Then we could potentially grow you a new liver in a vat based on your own stem cells in a matter of months. We might even be able to automate surgeries such as liver replacement. That kind of technology seems like it should be feasible within 20-30 years with targeted research.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#103

Post by varelse » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:14 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #34

aresant wrote: post #8

This all feels like the Ocean's 11 version of biotech The straight laced CEO as foil with an amazing reputation and a ticking biological clock (1) The mad scientist known for mixing human and monkey embryos (2) The beautiful and brilliant husband & wife whiz kid team (3) All funded by the secretive Russian billionaire with questionable fortune originations (4) Grabbing the popcorn (1) https://altoslabs.com/team/execu…

You are forgetting the iron law of real-life business stories: the better they seem, the worse they are.

From what I have heard the CEO is not only worse than you imagine, he is worse than you can imagine. But it's all scuttlebutt and hearsay for now. Rich aging VC got to reach for those stars...

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/threads/hal-barron-racks-up...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/banks-ready-34-billion-financ...

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#104

Post by whatshisface » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

ethbr0 wrote: post #65

aresant wrote: post #8

This all feels like the Ocean's 11 version of biotech The straight laced CEO as foil with an amazing reputation and a ticking biological clock (1) The mad scientist known for mixing human and monkey embryos (2) The beautiful and brilliant husband & wife whiz kid team (3) All funded by the secretive Russian billionaire with questionable fortune originations (4) Grabbing the popcorn (1) https://altoslabs.com/team/execu…

To be fair: there are some areas of research [0][1] which cannot but help sound like fantasy. Even were they to be pursued with the utmost rigor. Which by definition they can't be, because the very people and institutions required to do so would shy away because it's too fantastic of an endeavor. So here's to the dreamers! It's your (Russian oligarch) money, break a leg! [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_…

Biosphere 2 didn't turn out very well if I'm remembering the story right.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#105

Post by orangecat » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

woke_neoliberal wrote: post #7

There have been several companies formed in the past few years whose premise is researching in industry anti-aging or basic science more generally (Calico, Altos Labs, Arcadia, etc.)... Does anyone understand the underlying economics or motivations? They can't be gambles when they raise $B's, and I'm too cynical to believe these are altruistic endeavors. Certainly there is research that cannot be reasonably expected…

Does anyone understand the underlying economics or motivations?

How much would you pay for a treatment to prevent or repair the negative effects of aging? For me the answer is "well over 100% of my net worth".

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#106

Post by dandare » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

We talk a lot (actually, not enough) about the dangers of AI, but we rarely discuss the perils of longevity. Not that they are similar, but both are somewhat underrated.

- Once there will be a scientific breakthrough in longevity, everything will happen very fast. The time between the first and the billionth vaccine against ageing probably won't be much longer than one year.

- The breakthrough may be just around the corner (10, 20 30 years...) - many people seem to be putting their money on it.

- Sudden increase in the average lifespan by as little as 10 years would throw most pension funds and state budgets into disarray. Mind you, a 70 years old retiree rejuvenated back to his 60 won't be magically as productive as she was before she retired. She will be unemployed and 10 years behind on everything.

- Any significant lifespan enhancement will mean we have to renegotiate social contract about having kids. Will the vaccine come with strings attached? We can't even control our population explosion today.

- Not just science progresses one funeral at a time.(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30025879). Imagine having no real possibility progressing in your career, once the "best" will fill the ladder. Would you want your judge or police chief to be the same person for 50 years?

PS: That being said, I don't think we can or should hold back and it will be all worth it.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#107

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:17 PM UTC

metalliqaz wrote: post #58

marstall wrote: post #22

it's good to see billionaires putting money into health moonshots (vs real moonshots). Helps so many more people.

If immortality was somehow cracked, it would cause the end of civilization if it became available to everyone. Imagine the population of Earth ballooning to 12+ billion. Instead, it would be kept for the billionaires. Imagine the staggering inequality of 180-year-old trillionaires and their kin, that never ever relinquish their hordes. It's straight out of a cyberpunk dystopia. (Tessier-Ashpool comes to mind)

[deleted]

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#108

Post by bodhi_mind » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:18 PM UTC

paulluuk wrote: post #50

Mandelmus wrote: post #6

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck[1] Often paraphrased as "Science progresses one funeral at a time." I don't think we really want immortality or unnatural longevity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

I'd definitely want immortality in the sense of stopping physical (and mental) deterioration. You can always just commit suicide if you're done. I discuss this with friends and family occasionally, and they all seem to have these ideas that we're "only supposed to live 100 years or so". But that seems like a logical fallacy (appeal to nature) to me, it's not an actual argument. And sure, there are plenty of dystopian…

What makes us human, aka the “human condition” would definitely change. Motivation, knowledge, relationships, resources. It would be an evolutionary change in a non evolutionary timeline. Pretty crazy.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#109

Post by orangecat » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:19 PM UTC

smm11 wrote: post #30

If we'd all just cleaned up diets and got in shape, Covid wouldn't have been such a big deal. You can do lots, such as diet and exercise, to live better and longer, but nobody does. We want a magic pill.

If we'd all just cleaned up diets and got in shape, Covid wouldn't have been such a big deal.

It might have been somewhat better, but Covid is vastly more dangerous to the elderly than the young, and you're not getting around that with diet and exercise.

You can do lots, such as diet and exercise, to live better and longer

None of which is going to give an 80 year old the strength, mobility, and cognitive capacity they had when they were 30.

Re: A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

#110

Post by godelski » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:22 PM UTC

paulluuk wrote: post #50

Mandelmus wrote: post #6

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck[1] Often paraphrased as "Science progresses one funeral at a time." I don't think we really want immortality or unnatural longevity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

I'd definitely want immortality in the sense of stopping physical (and mental) deterioration. You can always just commit suicide if you're done. I discuss this with friends and family occasionally, and they all seem to have these ideas that we're "only supposed to live 100 years or so". But that seems like a logical fallacy (appeal to nature) to me, it's not an actual argument. And sure, there are plenty of dystopian…

I think it's because people think they stop growing. I was listening to Levitt's People I (Mostly) Admire and on a recent show he was talking about progress. How everyone will say in the last 10 years they've changed but if you ask them what they'll be in the next 10 years they think they'll be the same. But there's a lot of insight we often ignore.

I think similarly people ignore political and cultural progress. It's easy to blame the lack of progress on the old guard. But if we look at history we go much faster than that. One great example of this is the legalization of gay marriage. Pee [0] tracks support of it and it's clear that attitude is changing faster than the old people dying.

Also I think part of the problem is we've all gotten used to the Dragon Tyrant[1] that we accept our fate.

[0] https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-ga...

[1] https://youtu.be/cZYNADOHhVY