Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've added an action item to our sync up.
I don't have enough bandwidth right now.
I'll ping you tomorrow.
Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
261–270 of 400 posts
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#262Not going to lie, I read the first two lines, stopped, opened a new tab, and searched for Calico. Then came back and read the rest of the post.
I really wish tech companies would stop naming themselves after things that already exist. It just pollutes the search space, and there are plenty of nonce words out there that sound cool.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Simple: indefinite lifespan for the members of tiny minority Group A will turn them into a ruling elite even if they're not one already. You can't separate the issue of lifespan from social hierarchy.
> Simple: indefinite lifespan for the members of tiny minority Group A will turn them into a ruling elite even if they're not one already. Evidence or rationale supporting this conclusion?
Two words: compound interest.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean, that there might be a war between the 150 year olds and the 250 year olds? Sign me up! I don't even care for which side! The base state of the world that we live in is that everybody dies . Your hypotheticals about how horrible it might be to live in a world where people might not die have to be pretty horrible to compete with what is already true . (Mind you, this is not an unleapable bar, in my opinion, b…
Dying isn't horrible at all. It's a part of the lifecycle.
> It's a part of the lifecycle.
Because something is natural (part of the lifecycle) doesn't make it good or bad.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely it is better for people to not die - to not cease to exist - even if that means they rise to the top of the social hierarchy? Not unless they're going to be benevolent rulers, no. I will not grant people immortal life so that they can make everyone else's lives into a living hell.
By that logic, we should never have eradicated smallpox. Medicine extends lifespan - and a rising tide lifts all boats.
By that logic, we should never have eradicated smallpox.
We eradicated smallpox for everyone, without distinction between rulers and ruled. That's the difference!
a rising tide lifts all boats.
"A witty saying proves nothing." -- Voltaire
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is one of those rare times that powerful people make bold choices that catalyze a shift in the world's thought paradigm. Let's just go ahead and pump the brakes here before we start clapping each other on the back and talking about shifted paradigms. I'll gladly join in the happy-clappy fest once some actual results come through. But saying we've catalyzed a shift in the world's thought paradigm (that is a rea…
An interesting point from one of Calico's announcements is a statement that curing all cancer would only add ~3 years to the expected lifespan. This is thought provoking - if even a perfect solution to such a problem won't give us what we want, then we do need to "make people think differently" and try to focus on a different, bigger problem than the current approach of trying to strike out separate illnesses. By the…
the difference lies in quality of living. dying of cancer is a shitty way to go.
having a massive stroke/heart attack/aneurisma? at least you pop and you're gone. going through chemo/radio for months/years to slowly, painfully wither away is bullshit.
same is true for all those diseases, parkinsons, alzheimers, etc.
fuck them all. they are the bane of our existance, literally. pure evil.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Simple: indefinite lifespan for the members of tiny minority Group A will turn them into a ruling elite even if they're not one already. Evidence or rationale supporting this conclusion?
Two words: compound interest.
> Two words: compound interest.
Compound interest works intergenerationally as well as within a lifetime, so that doesn't seem to be much of an argument.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then fund a nonprofit research agency rather than a for-profit productizing company. Lots of countries have public healthcare systems who could administer life-extension treatments universally if they're not locked down and treated as proprietary, for-profit products!
It is pretty weird that it's not a non-profit, I'll give you that.
Why? What is the functional difference? Non-profits just funnel profits back to execs, instead of shareholders. Non-profit != lower prices.
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aubrey's reaction piece is listed on the front page of Time's website, and can be seen here: http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/18/finally-the-war-on-aging-ha...
That whole article is incredibly creepy -- 'War on Aging' -- do we really need more 'War on X' rhetoric? Regarding the fact that we know that we eventually die, he states > So soul-destroying has this knowledge been, for almost everyone, that we have constructed our entire society and world view around ways to put it out of our minds'. Absolutely ridiculous. Besides the fact that I think a 'soul' is a poorly-defined…
It's part of being a biological organism thus far. There's nothing to say we can't do better. To the rest -- in particular, the notion that wanting people not to die is "infantile" -- I reply with a link: http://www.yudkowsky.net/singularity/simplified/
Re: Google announces Calico, a new company that will focus on health and well-being
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather live in a world where my great-grandparents are in charge than not live at all.
It's worth considering that extended lifespans could have very well result in you not living at all - the Earth can only sustain a limited number of people, and extended lifespans would result in a necessary decrease in new lives brought into this world.
Any action of anyone could prevent somebody from being conceived. Or inaction. Simply refusing to have as much unprotected sex as you could physically have results in new lives not being brought into this world...
I don't think we need to maximize amount of new people for the sake of it.
Old generation owes to the new generation to not screw them up by using up resources/making world worse than they got it, etc. But they have absolutely no obligations to actually _make_ a new generation.