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

Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 247 posts

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#191

Post by ehnto »

Taek wrote: post #173
pdonis wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> evolution does not care much about what happens after your reproductive years have gone by So what? We humans care.

The tools that made us successful as a species capped our lifespans. Technology may have changed that equation such that it makes more sense to live longer (or forever), but if immortality had made evolutionary sense up to this point we'd see a few immortals walking around. For whatever reason, hardcoded death was the more successful route for a species to take. (with some notable exceptions. I believe there are spec…

Mother nature could never have awareness for the contexts in which we live now.

Purely biological success knows nothing of the societies we have built and the knowledge, ability to experience, and the complex contexts within which we all live our lives. Death really doesn't make sense for an individual, and no one is really itching for Humans V1.1 so the idea of letting evolution continue doesn't make much sense either.

If I could stop aging right now, I would be content with what I am capable of. Even if I die in 30 years from bus to head syndrome, I will have been fit and active for those years and that is a much better situation than slowly deteriorating to death.

That is the reality medicine has given us already, and anti-aging is only the focusing of a subset of general health issues that tend to cause problems as we age. It isn't the search for the imoral and exclusive elixr of life as some people seem to claim it is.

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#192

Post by inimino »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #98
nostrademons wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno. Constraints give us meaning. They're what force us to make choices, and it's choices and opportunity costs that let us define who we are at people. If we lived forever, we wouldn't have to make any hard choices - we'd just do it all. And paradoxically, being able to do it all means that none of it means anything. It's like playing a game with all the cheats on. Sure, they let you "win" super easily, but beca…

Anti-aging doesn't prevent death. You could still just as easily get hit by a car when you are 90 and look 20. Or 1000 and look 20, assuming that's even possible. What's really interesting is if people could actually prolong their lifespan indefinitely but we have the same limited bodies. Then you'll see people trying really hard to say alive to comical effect. I think Aronofsky's The Fountain is a really great outlo…

I'm not sure that was the outlook that film advocated.

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#193

Post by idra »

ThomPete wrote: post #164
solipsism wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're actually starting a conversation on HN about what the purpose of life is? Good luck...

No. I am asking why I wouldn't want to live forever.

Because you miss out on death, which is arguably the most important event in our lives.

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#194

Post by inimino »

zanny wrote: post #63
radiorental wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> real good by funding research Like the planet need humans to live longer???

Yes, because a huge part of the reason people disregard climate science today is because many of the people with the decision making authority to invest in actually correcting for it also judge they won't be alive to suffer from the consequences. Make humans live forever and suddenly everything matters. Interplanetary colonization for the preservation of the species alone is not enough, but to preserve themselves it…

And what are the long term consequences of immortality?

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#195

Post by jimjimjim »

a13n wrote: post #56

I'm not a billionaire and I'm not old, but I am so excited about anti-aging. I know Hacker News is super negative, but who doesn't want to live longer?! Of all the pain points humans experience, you'd think death lies pretty high on the list. Why are people fighting this?

i think the general idea is:

i want to live forever

i don't really want everyone else doing the same

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#196

Post by Taek »

ehnto wrote: post #191
Taek wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tools that made us successful as a species capped our lifespans. Technology may have changed that equation such that it makes more sense to live longer (or forever), but if immortality had made evolutionary sense up to this point we'd see a few immortals walking around. For whatever reason, hardcoded death was the more successful route for a species to take. (with some notable exceptions. I believe there are spec…

Mother nature could never have awareness for the contexts in which we live now. Purely biological success knows nothing of the societies we have built and the knowledge, ability to experience, and the complex contexts within which we all live our lives. Death really doesn't make sense for an individual, and no one is really itching for Humans V1.1 so the idea of letting evolution continue doesn't make much sense eith…

> no one is really itching for humans v1.1

Then why are we spending so much energy trying to augment ourselves? Better exercise, better diets, better schools, less disease, etc.

I would say that almost everyone can name something about themselves that they wish evolution had optimized more. (And if not evolution, then direct intervention).

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#197

Post by berntb »

ancient_kaiser wrote: post #189
ryuker16 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd imagine a society with 200 yr old people would be much wiser and sanely run.

Yes, that would be lovely, Kaiser Wilhem I would still sit on the throne of Prussia and Rutherford B Hayes would be seeking re-election.

This is probably the best pro-death argument -- the social consequences. The rest can be solved.

But in two to seven decades, when they have this problem, I doubt they will see it as a moral choice to kill (/refuse to save) people because a lot of them will be conservative.

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#198

Post by dwaltrip »

solipsism wrote: post #152
rezashirazian wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we agree up to "a 'loss' implies the lack of ability to use something you once were able to use". Since a dead person is unable to do anything, being a billionaire or not leads to the same conclusion. Where we differ is on the feeling that comes from that lacking. A dead person feels nothing and by your definition is not losing anything since they can't feel it. this is all very true and I agree, however as h…

You think, when billionaires think about death, that they're bemoaning the loss of their money? That's a very strange thing to believe, and I'm very sure it's wrong.

Perhaps think of it as lost opportunity, instead. More money often provides for more opportunity.

I think it is very natural to preemptively feel sorrow for some of the opportunities you will give up when you die.

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#199

Post by ehnto »

Taek wrote: post #196
ehnto wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mother nature could never have awareness for the contexts in which we live now. Purely biological success knows nothing of the societies we have built and the knowledge, ability to experience, and the complex contexts within which we all live our lives. Death really doesn't make sense for an individual, and no one is really itching for Humans V1.1 so the idea of letting evolution continue doesn't make much sense eith…

> no one is really itching for humans v1.1 Then why are we spending so much energy trying to augment ourselves? Better exercise, better diets, better schools, less disease, etc. I would say that almost everyone can name something about themselves that they wish evolution had optimized more. (And if not evolution, then direct intervention).

I guess that was my point, no one is expecting to enjoy the benefits of evolution (because of course they will be dead). So the argument of halting evolution or that it goes against the so far proven way to become a better species makes no sense. Better that we focus on working with what we have.

Perhaps the version was number a bad way to express that though!

Re: Anti-Aging Startup Raises $116M With Bezos Backing

#200

Post by vanviegen »

eagsalazar2 wrote: post #187

Humans should not be immortal like gods until they attain godlike control of their impulse to consume and reproduce. If we get total liberation from nature's constraints (already 90% there), without evolving a corresponding ability to plan and resource long term, it will make the ecological disaster we're already witnessing 1000X worse and we'll likely destroy ourselves anyway. I'm not saying death doesn't suck or th…

I tend to agree with you. On the other hand, being 'immortal' might be a pretty good incentive to start considering long-term problems. And especially since the first generations of 'immortals' would probably be the ultra-wealthy and ultra-powerful, that might actually do some good!
Post reply on HN