Sooner or later we all have to die. It's inevitable. But, if you feel like you might have wasted your life if you were to die tomorrow, why not get up and do something about it?
As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
31–40 of 123 posts
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#32It's not the lack of cryo arrangements that's the problem. (I've considered cryo myself, but I'm not impressed with the likelyhood of success. Too many fracturing events, not to mention the likely extreme costs of recovery post-freezer. But if you're looking for more life, it's your only potential option.) The problem is that we haven't been focusing enough on the real issue: Death. Finding ways to extend human life…
By "death", I assume you mean senescence: the natural biomolecular attrition that inexorably leads to organismal death absent of outside causes. It is true that turtles can live for almost 200 years and some plants can live for thousands of years. If we are essentially, biochemically the same, we could in theory overcome our biochemical "bugs" to achieve negligible senescence. So, we'd live forever. Unfortunately, th…
Continuing on this point, it might be a hell of a lot easier to create an artificial brain (or at least AI as clever as a human) than reverse engineer a biological system "designed" to expire.
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#33These visionary geniuses and hackers' most brilliant breakthrough was the realization of the inevitable fact that sooner or later, we all die. The trick is in channeling that truth as a motivator. We must strive to achieve as much as possible today, because there might not be a tomorrow. Steve Jobs: No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. And yet death is the destinat…
This is a false dichotomy. You can strive to achieve as much as possible today, as well as attempt a second chance at life through cryonics.
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we find (an affordable) way to extend human life indefinitely, then at some point individuals are going to be faced with the choice of voluntarily "stepping aside" (or whatever polite term we might come up with) or stop having children. I don't think either would be in most people's nature, which doesn't seem to lead to any pleasant consequences I can think of.
Actually, everyone could still have one child each. Each successive generation would be 1/2 the size of the previous and the population would approach a limit of approximately two times what it currently is since 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8... = 2.
The dating scene would suck in the later generations of this scheme - assuming monogamy.
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
By "death", I assume you mean senescence: the natural biomolecular attrition that inexorably leads to organismal death absent of outside causes. It is true that turtles can live for almost 200 years and some plants can live for thousands of years. If we are essentially, biochemically the same, we could in theory overcome our biochemical "bugs" to achieve negligible senescence. So, we'd live forever. Unfortunately, th…
Continuing on this point, it might be a hell of a lot easier to create an artificial brain (or at least AI as clever as a human) than reverse engineer a biological system "designed" to expire.
I see we're reading from the same playbook. It would be cleaner to abandon biology, but how do you design something smarter than yourself? Is it easier? Nobody has a clue since we've never purposefully created human intelligence or AGI.
(Our replicators have, but they're responsible for this mess in the first place)
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#36To do away with death is to do away with evolution. Not a very good idea. We should work towards improving the quality of life rather than extend it.
Would have been happier if the article was "as more people fall to chronically painful illnesses, isn't it time we act?"
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, everyone could still have one child each. Each successive generation would be 1/2 the size of the previous and the population would approach a limit of approximately two times what it currently is since 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8... = 2.
The dating scene would suck in the later generations of this scheme - assuming monogamy.
Immortality is generally taken to imply eternal youth as well (at least moderate youth). Not a lot of people want to live forever in a body that continues to age. Given eternal youth, there's no reason an 18-year old would be restricted to dating other 18-year olds. They could just as easily date 1000-year olds (unless by monogamy you mean eternal pairing).
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dating scene would suck in the later generations of this scheme - assuming monogamy.
Immortality is generally taken to imply eternal youth as well (at least moderate youth). Not a lot of people want to live forever in a body that continues to age. Given eternal youth, there's no reason an 18-year old would be restricted to dating other 18-year olds. They could just as easily date 1000-year olds (unless by monogamy you mean eternal pairing).
I was mostly joking, but yes by monogamy I meant mostly long-term/permanent pairing, which seems highly unlikely to me in a post-death civilization.
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#39It's not the lack of cryo arrangements that's the problem. (I've considered cryo myself, but I'm not impressed with the likelyhood of success. Too many fracturing events, not to mention the likely extreme costs of recovery post-freezer. But if you're looking for more life, it's your only potential option.) The problem is that we haven't been focusing enough on the real issue: Death. Finding ways to extend human life…
I agree biological immortality is a lofty goal, but it is orders of magnitude harder than space race. At least with getting people into space, the basic techniques (launch rocket, orbit earth) and constraints were figured out. Devil was in the endless details. Humans still barely understand how aging works, much less how to theoretically stop it. Sure there's hypotheses here and there, but no unified description or s…
The one thing we understand the least is us. Sounds like endless potential for research opportunities. A real challenge. Maybe the project doesn't result in effective immortality. But the space race didn't result in only getting to orbit or only landing men on the Moon. The side benefits would be as beneficial as the final goal.
Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?
#40Anyone remotely interested in cryonics should go read about it on LessWrong[1], instead of reading the same ol' ambivalent/pro-death comments. The only good reasons (that I can think of right now) not to sign up are if (1) you can't afford the ~$50/month or whatever your life insurance premiums + member dues would be, or (2) you rely on the financial support of people who are strongly anti-cryonics. Keep in mind that…
>The only good reasons (that I can think of right now) not to sign up are if (1) you can't afford the ~$50/month or whatever your life insurance premiums + member dues would be, or (2) you rely on the financial support of people who are strongly anti-cryonics.
Or you think it's dumb and fruitless and a waste of money. We don't have any way of predicting the expected value of cryopreservation. It could be that after you get frozen, an earthquake/tsunami takes out the power and you thaw. Or the company goes under. Or you get abandoned. Or any number of other things.
How likely are you to be unfrozen/cured/revived? No one can say for sure, but it's probably pretty unlikely. On the other hand, what's the likelihood that your estate can do something useful with an extra $25k? That's pretty likely.