A $3B bet on finding the fountain of youth

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 7:37 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #74

paulluuk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, too, would rather not die. But "the only real problem" you see being overpopulation speaks to a limited effort in thinking out the consequences. Let's imagine such a solution was available. Let's remember that insulin today is barely affordable to most people, a mere "stay alive and subsist" drug. So it's probably safe to assume that a literal immortality treatment would be only available to the most wealthy and p…

Post by HWR_14 » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 7:41 PM UTC

darkstar999 wrote: post #141

Any thoughts on how these efforts could conflict with our climate goals? Should we have an age ceiling? (that sounds awful, but so does the idea of everyone living to 150)

Post by simplestats » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 7:44 PM UTC

orangecat wrote: post #105

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".

Post by wefarrell » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 7:51 PM UTC

drran wrote: post #120

wefarrell wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's the problem of the elderly continuing to accumulate wealth and power without ceding any to the younger generations. It's already happening. Look no further than the geriatric US lawmakers and how out of touch they are with the future.

Create a startup and disrupt them with a new technology.

Post by manmal » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

yawnxyz wrote: post #154

orangecat wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

I could imagine living as a subscription model...