What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans? • Hacker News Board

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#371

Post by scotty79 » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:34 AM UTC

yreg wrote: post #260

sangnoir wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm absolutely shocked that more money and time is not spent researching how to cure death by aging. Faced with their own mortality, a bunch of aging billionaires and multimillionaires tend to pour money into longevity research. I'd be very upset if governments increased spending on fighting senescence today, instead of lower-hanging fruit .

When Elon was asked why longetivity research didn't pick his interest as worthy of an investment, he said: >It is important for us to die because most of the time people don't change their mind, they just die. If you live forever, we might become a very ossified society where new ideas cannot succeed.

Maybe old people living longer would make us finally create some mechanisms of power rotation instead of just patiently waiting for old power to die.

Mechanism that could be applied way earlier than old ossified out of touch rulers die now. And applied more merit based.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#372

Post by m4rtink » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:36 AM UTC

scotty79 wrote: post #360

wintorez wrote: post #168

Never understood the quest for immortality. We are the children of our time. When our time passes, we will live as strangers in a strange land, drowning in the sea of nostalgia. Death will simply takes us back to where we came from before our birth. Don’t fear the reaper.

> Death will simply takes us back to where we came from before our birth. Except it doesn't. Death is the end of everything for you. It's ultimate loss of any game you might have participated in. And there's nothing else. When you die then there's no longer any you. And there will never be you in any shape or form. When you die it's as if your family home burnt to ashes along with your family inside and family busine…

And not just that - for those still alive the dead person usually causes quite a bit of suffering! Death is really not a good idea for everyone involved.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#373

Post by neuronic » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:41 AM UTC

wintorez wrote: post #168

Never understood the quest for immortality. We are the children of our time. When our time passes, we will live as strangers in a strange land, drowning in the sea of nostalgia. Death will simply takes us back to where we came from before our birth. Don’t fear the reaper.

There are definitely reasons to fear the reaper.

When we go return to where we came from before our birth it simply means the absence of consciousness. In this universe, you can either be conscious or not. There is something mysterious and magical about this phenomenon that seemingly differentiates our lives from simpler or even single celled organisms which seem more like biological robots.

It may very well be that the next time a consciousness manifests and forms a 'you' from 'the place before birth' you may as well be born as a cow, shackled in the darkness among feces. Kept from the warmth of your mother with cold metal spikes attached to her udder, ripping open the young flesh of your nose when you seek its nourishment.

How many times did we wake up yet from this 'place before birth'? How likely is it to be born as human among the conscious life forms on Earth? Nevermind being born as healthy human in the developed world in the 21st century.

Between the clear dry science and the mysterious wonder of a perception of 'self' and being consciously aware I just feel dizzy about it all.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#374

Post by jorvi » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:42 AM UTC

psychphysic wrote: post #311

epicureanideal wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm absolutely shocked that more money and time is not spent researching how to cure death by aging. (Note that for those who discuss this semi-regularly, that's understood to be very different than seeking a cure for any particular age related disease, which usually we attempt to address when it's too late.). There are groups like https://www.levf.org/ doing some early work like Robust Mouse Rejuvenation (in mid-lif…

There's a decent amount of research but it's hard! Most of it is on fruit flies and mice then takes a life time to test on humans! What we do know is that being fit and exercising with some semblance of healthy eating helps people live a lot longer. But no one wants to do it.

> What we do know is that being fit and exercising with some semblance of healthy eating helps people live a lot longer.

No, abstaining from things like alcohol and smoking mostly does that.

Exercise and healthy eating markedly improves quality of life at old age, but it doesn’t extend it by huge amounts.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#375

Post by amelius » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:43 AM UTC

saiya-jin wrote: post #294

epicureanideal wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm absolutely shocked that more money and time is not spent researching how to cure death by aging. (Note that for those who discuss this semi-regularly, that's understood to be very different than seeking a cure for any particular age related disease, which usually we attempt to address when it's too late.). There are groups like https://www.levf.org/ doing some early work like Robust Mouse Rejuvenation (in mid-lif…

I would actively pay to fight such a movement. The world is full, yes it can be fuller but we are seriously cracking whole ecosystem and one of main reason is simply the amount of people living on this planet. If you prolong life say 2x it means Earth has 2x the population long term just due to this. Lets focus on serious issues hindering our growth as a race and not some vanity fears of few rich and powerful who thi…

You should check out Hans Rosling's talk on overpopulation.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#376

Post by m4rtink » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:44 AM UTC

terminal_d wrote: post #202

ramraj07 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I for one would like a bit more time. 200? Maybe 500? No one likely wants to be immortal but 80 or so seems criminally short for what our abilities are and how long it takes for us to find our calling.

I think 100 is quite enough -- life is meant to be lived with people one knows.

If others do the same, you could spent more time with people you know than you can now!

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#377

Post by neuronic » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:45 AM UTC

yreg wrote: post #260

sangnoir wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm absolutely shocked that more money and time is not spent researching how to cure death by aging. Faced with their own mortality, a bunch of aging billionaires and multimillionaires tend to pour money into longevity research. I'd be very upset if governments increased spending on fighting senescence today, instead of lower-hanging fruit .

When Elon was asked why longetivity research didn't pick his interest as worthy of an investment, he said: >It is important for us to die because most of the time people don't change their mind, they just die. If you live forever, we might become a very ossified society where new ideas cannot succeed.

This wisdom was already the topic of cartoons, books and movies 30+ years ago. If you attach 'Elon Musk' to a quote it immediately becomes relevant to some gullible people, it's truly amazing.

To add some good mood, I stole a comment from reddit [1] which describes one of millions of media dealing with this question:

> In The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy series, immortality is fine if you're born that way. It's only if you accidentally obtain it after an accident with a few rubber bands, a liquid lunch, and a particle accelerator is it a bad thing that you are not equipped to deal with and so decide to insult everyone in the universe in alphabetical order.

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/books/comments/tpzb4e/immortality_i...

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#378

Post by stareatgoats » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:46 AM UTC

Retric wrote: post #355

stareatgoats wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it is literally what is says under the heading "Common elements": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-death_experience#Common_e...

The very first paragraph says: A near-death experience (NDE) is a profound personal experience associated with death or impending death which researchers claim share similar characteristics. When positive, such experiences may encompass a variety of sensations including detachment from the body, feelings of levitation, total serenity, security, warmth, the experience of absolute dissolution, and the presence of a lig…

Fair enough. Point taken.

But how many have had the unpleasant experience? The first reference to such is a paper by Nancy bush and Bruce Greyson, which opens the study thus: "The great majority of near-death experiences (NDEs) reported publicly over the past four decades have been described as pleasant, even glorious. Almost unnoticed in the euphoria about them has been the sobering fact that not all NDEs are so affirming. Some are deeply disturbing."[0]

So most are positive, a minority are deeply disturbing. The overarching purpose here was not however to paint any potential afterlife i glowing terms, it was to highlight the fact that there seems to be a widely (probably under-)reported process that we humans experience when we die. Which seems relevant in a discussion about cryogenics.

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173534/

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#379

Post by ShredKazoo » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:47 AM UTC

Gatsky wrote: post #357

kragen wrote: post #62

unfortunate that the author didn't bother to distinguish between the effects of state-of-the-art cryopreservation by vitrification and the older cryopreservation procedures that produced the massive fracture damages they mention an awful lot of the article seems to be about how weird it is for people to study things carefully and try to do things that are not known to be possible, with the implicit subtext that being…

So what I think is the most likely outcome is that we realise there are better ways to preserve the dead for reanimation, and nobody will ever bother working on how to salvage the crudely frozen/vitrified. I personally think the way forward is to derive the neural connectivity and transcriptional state map of the brain on a single cell level. This can be done today, albeit at great expense, on tissue that is chemical…

>nobody will ever bother working on how to salvage the crudely frozen/vitrified.

I disagree, I think salvaging them will be of tremendous historical interest. Imagine if we could bring back a peasant from the 1400s. Medieval scholars would be all over that.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#380

Post by aussieshibe » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 10:48 AM UTC

recuter wrote: post #348

wiz21c wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, this statement is true for many plans of the elite :-)

I too upon hearing of a lunatic beating a frozen disembodied head to gallagheresque pulp with a blunt instrument can't help but smile sardonically if the resulting goop was formerly wealthier than me. Cool and normal. Power to the people bro. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It's just like I always say: class warfare is a dish best served cryogenically frozen.