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

We Need to Die

willllliam.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 190 posts

Re: We Need to Die

#141

Post by bluefirebrand »

igor47 wrote: post #109
blargey wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why people have it in their heads that this "making way" requires one to be cast into the formless void instead of, like, a gated community.

I do think we're significant more likely to solve immortality than the problem of getting old rich powerful people to relinquish their grip on wealth and power

> the problem of getting old rich powerful people to relinquish their grip on wealth and power

This is a solved problem, guillotines worked wonders for this back in the day.

Re: We Need to Die

#142

Post by toss1 »

A SciFi book I read decades ago where the premise was that aging had been broken, had insights that still stick with me. The character of a young woman 28 years old who pretended to be 105 to seem more interesting to people. That when people got to be 400-500 years old and had been through a dozen careers, they started getting bored and taking up high-risk activities (skydiving, etc.).

I remember little else (I wish I could to find it and read it again), but those shifts of perspective seem entirely plausible and revealing of how we look at life.

The biggest reason we need to die, or create entirely different power structures, is to ensure no one can amass resources and power to rule forever. However bad a psychotic despot is, at least now, death will come collect him. Imagine an effective eternity with Putin and the oligarchs as your country's leader, just getting better and better at impoverishing the country for their own gain.

Re: We Need to Die

#143

Post by bee_rider »

Antibabelic wrote: post #122
bee_rider wrote: post #8

Bah, nah, I’ll take immortality thanks. I want to see where it all goes. I do think there’s a risk of societal stagnation if we all stick around forever. But, maybe we can make a deal—if we all end up immortal, we can make a threshold, maybe even as young as 80 or something, and have people retire and stop voting at that point. Let society stay vivacious, sure. Give us an end point for our toils, definitely, and a de…

> Put us in computers I feel like this is a modern version of believing in souls. You are matter, not data. If you find a way to simulate yourself on a computer, this will not prevent you from experiencing death. And if that's the case, what's the point? Stroking your ego with the knowledge that a simulation of you will stick around for some time after you give up the ghost?

Maybe we’re already the simulations, just, this part of our memories is the back-propagation used to figure out where the saved copy came from.

Re: We Need to Die

#144

Post by coldtea »

>You can see this in retirement, actually. There's real data showing mortality spikes in the years after people stop working. The structure of striving, even when it felt like a burden, was providing something that leisure alone can't replace. People who stop pursuing things often just... decline.

There's a popular cope answer to this "that wont be the case with me".

But unless you already have either a concrete footing in enjoying the small things in life just for themselves, or a greater mission that falls outside the line of work you'll retire from (like being an activist, or a hobbyist programmer or musician or something), then it absolutely will be the case.

Re: We Need to Die

#145

Post by didgeoridoo »

Apocryphon wrote: post #43
bee_rider wrote: post #8

Bah, nah, I’ll take immortality thanks. I want to see where it all goes. I do think there’s a risk of societal stagnation if we all stick around forever. But, maybe we can make a deal—if we all end up immortal, we can make a threshold, maybe even as young as 80 or something, and have people retire and stop voting at that point. Let society stay vivacious, sure. Give us an end point for our toils, definitely, and a de…

"I plan to live forever, of course, but barring that I'd settle for a couple thousand years. Even five hundred would be pretty nice."

Get out of here, Nwabudike. This doesn’t concern you.

Re: We Need to Die

#146

Post by riskable »

serf wrote: post #99
bee_rider wrote: post #8

Bah, nah, I’ll take immortality thanks. I want to see where it all goes. I do think there’s a risk of societal stagnation if we all stick around forever. But, maybe we can make a deal—if we all end up immortal, we can make a threshold, maybe even as young as 80 or something, and have people retire and stop voting at that point. Let society stay vivacious, sure. Give us an end point for our toils, definitely, and a de…

whenever I imagine immortality en masse I imagine the hobbies that people started experimenting with after exposure to the concept of deathlessness in the short story 'The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect'. that story is flawed for a lot of reasons, but it's interesting to explore what happens if death is essentially conquered. it's hard to judge whether or not society as depicted in that story stagnated.. but it was…

I think that if no one died of old age, predators would eventually emerge that preyed on the old. It seems like it's an inescapable part of nature.

Re: We Need to Die

#147

Post by keycon »

This article says that our limited time on Earth encourages us to be ourselves. That our eventual death is necessary for our ambitions, desires, and accomplishments (which then produce a concept of Self) and that those things are what make life worth living.

I would argue that how you view yourself is not what makes life worth living. Life is enjoyable and peaceful without desire or identity. Wanting to extend your life isn't a maladaptation. Your identity--maybe as a software developer, or as a good romantic partner, or as a virtuous person--is the real maladaptation. It results in attachment and thus eventual suffering. If you get fired from your software developer job, your ego takes a hit. If you get into a fight with your partner, you feel indignant.

You really don't need an identity to love one another or ambition to do hard things. We have an inner drive to be creative completely outside of how we view ourselves. We feel love naturally. You'll enjoy life without desires or Self.

Re: We Need to Die

#148

Post by ileonichwiesz »

IAmBroom wrote: post #19
Legend2440 wrote: post #13

>You can see this in retirement, actually. There's real data showing mortality spikes in the years after people stop working. The structure of striving, even when it felt like a burden, was providing something that leisure alone can't replace. People who stop pursuing things often just... decline. Or maybe people stop working because their health was declining?

The counterpoint is in all the people who pursue daily goals intensely, at high ages. POTUSes and SCOTUSes, by example, tend to outlive most USians, and tend to stay active with projects or jobs long beyond normal retirement.

The people you mentioned are also wealthy and have access to a level of healthcare far beyond the average person.

Re: We Need to Die

#149

Post by thunkle »

dvt wrote: post #5

I've had this (often drunken) conversation many times, I think mortality is fundamentally ingrained in not just the human condition, but the fabric of our universe. Without the finality of death, life seems to lose its meaning. Not only do we need to die, we are compelled to die, we should die. This memento mori makes every day, ironically, worth living. One of my favorite verses from the Bible is Job 1:21, where he…

What if you live forever on Earth but miss out on a much better place God has created for those who die.

Re: We Need to Die

#150

Post by joshmarlow »

dwroberts wrote: post #118
joshmarlow wrote: post #3

> Bryan Johnson is an interesting case here. If you take the longevity project to its logical end, you get someone who's stopped living in order to keep living - for the most part not eating food he enjoys, not drinking, not doing anything spontaneous, all in service of more years. I never understand this type of critique of Johnson. It's framed like he's suffering daily for his project, but the guy sounds happy as a…

> Seems like he's doing something right He’s going to spend the remainder of his life obsessing over something he cannot control, and then he’s going to die at a normal age (or probably earlier) any way

I suppose I don't see how that's a problem if he's happy in the process - which he certainly appears to be.
Post reply on HN