As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it? • Hacker News Board

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#61

Post by xmmm » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:19 AM UTC

davidu wrote: post #7

cydonian_monk wrote: post #5

It's not the lack of cryo arrangements that's the problem. (I've considered cryo myself, but I'm not impressed with the likelyhood of success. Too many fracturing events, not to mention the likely extreme costs of recovery post-freezer. But if you're looking for more life, it's your only potential option.) The problem is that we haven't been focusing enough on the real issue: Death. Finding ways to extend human life…

I hadn't considered my greatest fear, but now I recognize it: Finding ways to extend human life indefinitely should be our generation's "Space Race." We already suffer from over-population and pollution. Death is a key piece of the demographic shift, and just about every other anthropological process related to the change and evolution of culture and society. Living longer would not increase our society's capability…

I fail to understand how overpopulation or any other negative consequence of eternal life can be worse than death.

Death is final. Other things we can deal with.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#62

Post by lsparrish » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:20 AM UTC

fl3tch wrote: post #14

nknight wrote: post #6

Maybe when there's real evidence that cryonics is actually useful? Hackers of all people ought to know that no matter what your models say, it's all bullshit until you test it. And as far as I know, there's not even a model generally accepted by the scientific community that indicates any reasonable probability of success anyway.

Models are tested by experiments. Freeze a dog for a few years and resuscitate it, then we can talk seriously about the value of cryopreservation. Until then, you're throwing your money away in a desperate grasp at immortality. And that's money that could actually help real people now. At least that could be your legacy. Don't be the next Newton trying to turn crap into gold.

Most of the money goes into an investment account, and eventually to biotech/nanotech research to reanimate the patient. Most of the work in reanimating the patient is repairing extreme brain damage (from cold and ischemia).

Repairing brain damage is extremely valuable to people who suffer from it, and to society. Sure there are more direct ways to fund brain damage research, but you don't get the same motivation; this feels like a selfish benefit to the person who spends on it so it is more likely to compete with luxuries instead of charitable causes.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#63

Post by lsparrish » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:29 AM UTC

nknight wrote: post #6

Maybe when there's real evidence that cryonics is actually useful? Hackers of all people ought to know that no matter what your models say, it's all bullshit until you test it. And as far as I know, there's not even a model generally accepted by the scientific community that indicates any reasonable probability of success anyway.

Brain slices have really high cell survival rates (normal electrical activity), and rabbit kidneys have been reanimated with full functionality.

At a minimum there should be a very large and prestigious prize (like the X-Prize) for milestones such as demonstrating organized whole brain electrical activity.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#64

Post by AngryParsley » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:33 AM UTC

georgieporgie wrote: post #57

AngryParsley wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is not "if" but "when." Biotech and medicine are only getting better. At some point we'll be able to reverse aging, then we'll have to deal with the consequences. To prevent overpopulation, people can either have kids or live incredibly long lives. Not both. I bet once indefinite life extension becomes feasible, something along these lines will happen: Everyone who had serious philosophical conundra on t…

To prevent overpopulation, people can either have kids or live incredibly long lives. Not both. Space travel would alleviate that restriction.

True, but we'd hit that limit too. Space travel would allow cubic growth at best (expanding at c in all directions). Populations typically grow exponentially.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#65

Post by thehotdon » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:37 AM UTC

usaar333 wrote: post #32

fl3tch wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By "death", I assume you mean senescence: the natural biomolecular attrition that inexorably leads to organismal death absent of outside causes. It is true that turtles can live for almost 200 years and some plants can live for thousands of years. If we are essentially, biochemically the same, we could in theory overcome our biochemical "bugs" to achieve negligible senescence. So, we'd live forever. Unfortunately, th…

Continuing on this point, it might be a hell of a lot easier to create an artificial brain (or at least AI as clever as a human) than reverse engineer a biological system "designed" to expire.

Exactly! Why would anyone want to live forever in a human body, when they could just build themselves a kick-ass robot body instead.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#66

Post by burgerbrain » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:50 AM UTC

jpulgarin wrote: post #44

dpark wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only good reasons (that I can think of right now) not to sign up are if (1) you can't afford the ~$50/month or whatever your life insurance premiums + member dues would be, or (2) you rely on the financial support of people who are strongly anti-cryonics. Or you think it's dumb and fruitless and a waste of money. We don't have any way of predicting the expected value of cryopreservation. It could be that after…

How can you say that cryonics working is "probably pretty unlikely" if "we have no way of predicting the expected value of cryopreservation". You can give probabilities to the events that would make cryonics fail and come up with an expected value.

Not all unknowns are equally likely.

Downvoter: I raise you a Russell's Teapot.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#67

Post by burgerbrain » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:53 AM UTC

evgen wrote: post #51

thret wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's a non-zero chance that you will be returned to life at some point in the future, then however unlikely that chance is worth 25k. It is a lottery; the cost is small compared to the payoff and it rationalises hope.

Sounds a lot like Pascal's wager; small cost, high benefit, equally ridiculous probability of a payoff...

Well, at least cryo tanks are tangible.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#68

Post by lsparrish » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:57 AM UTC

jpulgarin wrote: post #49

thret wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's a non-zero chance that you will be returned to life at some point in the future, then however unlikely that chance is worth 25k. It is a lottery; the cost is small compared to the payoff and it rationalises hope.

I have discovered a way of extending anyone's life. I will extend yours if you send me 25k via paypal. You can find my email in my profile. Note that this is a non-zero chance.

There's an astronomically high probability that you're saying this to make a point, not because you have secret information. That fits perfectly with my model of expected human behavior. The question would be why your model of expected cryobiology/physics/future scientific development places its chance of success in anything like a similarly low category.

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#69

Post by vacri » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:57 AM UTC

thret wrote: post #48

dpark wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only good reasons (that I can think of right now) not to sign up are if (1) you can't afford the ~$50/month or whatever your life insurance premiums + member dues would be, or (2) you rely on the financial support of people who are strongly anti-cryonics. Or you think it's dumb and fruitless and a waste of money. We don't have any way of predicting the expected value of cryopreservation. It could be that after…

If there's a non-zero chance that you will be returned to life at some point in the future, then however unlikely that chance is worth 25k. It is a lottery; the cost is small compared to the payoff and it rationalises hope.

Also often forgotten is that biology isn't like an on/off switch - will you come back the same way physcially? Mentally? Could you live with having lost some of your higher mental facilities?

Re: As more hackers start to die, when do we finally do something about it?

#70

Post by burgerbrain » Fri, Oct 14, 2011, 6:58 AM UTC

wavephorm wrote: post #21

michaelochurch wrote: post #3

What makes you think no one wants to die? No one knows for sure if there's anything on the other side, but I definitely don't want to stick around this world forever. Immortality would be a curse.

Long life != immortality. Obviously nobody really wants to be immortal and one day outlast the solar-system and eventually be left floating around in space for trillions of years.

"one day outlast the solar-system and eventually be left floating around in space for trillions of years."

Where can I sign up?