31–40 of 141 posts
There is something dystopian, childish, naive, desperate, arrogant, sad and tragic about billionaires founding and funding longevity companies and projects. They think that they've got it all, but deep down there's still this gaping hole of meaninglessness. They can control evertything. Everything but death. If only they can find a way to live longer, maybe even a way to never die of natural causes, everything will b…
Your feeling of arrogance seems to be a product of a cultural programmed reaction. There's no shortage of movies, cultural works, and tv shows that tell us that immortality is unwanted, unattainable, selfish, or somehow otherwise bad, starting with our oldest myths and stories, Epic of Gilgamesh.
If the goal of medicine is to cure or prevent every diseases and dysfunction in the human body, then we must conclude that as an unavoidable side effect that being healthier will extend long life.
If we care about our fellow human beings, especially the elderly, then we do not want them to live in pain, to be in dementia, or otherwise have a poor quality of life. We must also recognize that many of them may not want to die.
I applaud the pursuit of longevity and health so long it is paired with the egalitarian outcome in that everybody will be entitled and receive it, regardless of who they are and what they did.
There is something dystopian, childish, naive, desperate, arrogant, sad and tragic about billionaires founding and funding longevity companies and projects. They think that they've got it all, but deep down there's still this gaping hole of meaninglessness. They can control evertything. Everything but death. If only they can find a way to live longer, maybe even a way to never die of natural causes, everything will b…
On the other hand, it could actually provide tangible benefits to some human beings. Saying "I was the first to land a human on Mars" has no such advantage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's very little funding of longevity research apparently. Probably because of people sharing your opinion that stopping aging is selfish/immoral. But this is not right, we've severely underestimated the biological dangers of our overpopulated-overconnected world. We find ourselves needing to fight a pandemic with similar methods as in 1917, because we ve not prepared for that. Biotech should be an imperative for…
> people sharing your opinion that stopping aging is selfish/immoral. People share this opinion until they're on their deathbed. If offered a pill to be restored to youthful longevity in that moment, most people would give up everything and endure just about anything for a mere chance at it. People are remarkably shortsighted and don't take the time to comprehend what the horror at the end of the tunnel will really f…
The only enticing thing of that pill would be if you'd retain all your memories and material possessions, because let's say you had to compromise that:
- You get a pill but your memory will be wiped;
- The cost of the pill would be so high you'd lose all your material possessions;
What would be the difference between that and dying?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's very little funding of longevity research apparently. Probably because of people sharing your opinion that stopping aging is selfish/immoral. But this is not right, we've severely underestimated the biological dangers of our overpopulated-overconnected world. We find ourselves needing to fight a pandemic with similar methods as in 1917, because we ve not prepared for that. Biotech should be an imperative for…
> people sharing your opinion that stopping aging is selfish/immoral. People share this opinion until they're on their deathbed. If offered a pill to be restored to youthful longevity in that moment, most people would give up everything and endure just about anything for a mere chance at it. People are remarkably shortsighted and don't take the time to comprehend what the horror at the end of the tunnel will really f…
People weirdly reject it for some reason, even though there's no catch. I suspect it's a cultural cached response, because taking these pill always mean some sort of catch.
There is something dystopian, childish, naive, desperate, arrogant, sad and tragic about billionaires founding and funding longevity companies and projects. They think that they've got it all, but deep down there's still this gaping hole of meaninglessness. They can control evertything. Everything but death. If only they can find a way to live longer, maybe even a way to never die of natural causes, everything will b…
No if we lived to a 1000 years, almost all of our problems here would be solved -- as people would finally take responsibility for their futures.
The way the wealthy will take responsibility is by taking up the mantle of human zookeeper, restricting lesser people's locations and movements. Just look at where the toll roads are near you, it's already happening.
Then the negative actions necessary to create personal benefit will be limited to the areas of the lesser people. After you find the toll roads, look for the power plants and factories in your area.
There's a reason we keep coming back to fiction that elevates the obscenely wealthy as being beyond the law, beyond the control of governments, and eventually physically beyond the world in floating cities.
It's a small solace that rich people continue to die within the same age range as poor people. I hope I don't live long enough to witness longevity being solved for the 1% only.
edit: changed "gated behind price" to just "gated" since gatekeeping comes in many forms.
There is something dystopian, childish, naive, desperate, arrogant, sad and tragic about billionaires founding and funding longevity companies and projects. They think that they've got it all, but deep down there's still this gaping hole of meaninglessness. They can control evertything. Everything but death. If only they can find a way to live longer, maybe even a way to never die of natural causes, everything will b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just deathist brainrot. If we lived for 10k years "naturally", would you support killing people off after 70-80 years? Of course living longer would make things better.
Living that much longer through disease and natural degeneration elimination with the possibility of still dying from trauma might be quite horrible. Aversion to risk would logically skyrocket. Would skiing or even driving make sense?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Better?
Arguably worse since old people have stubborn thought processes, especially politically. Usually the only way societies get change is once all the "boomers" die off. I think it sad but death is evolved for a real reason and we should not forget Chesterton's fence, even if it was not designed but rather converged on by almost all species except for trees.