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

71–80 of 190 posts

Re: We Need to Die

#71

Post by Palomides »

tern wrote: post #45

For me, the biggest tell was how frequently older people report feeling completely at peace and ready to die. As my own life progressed, the feeling of novelty became harder to find, and then less important. Grief became easier, death became lighter. As I deepened my investigation into the nature of my own experience, I started to realize that "I" do not exist in the way that I originally assumed, and I started to wo…

that seems like a circular justification

if my body and mind were falling apart and all my friends/family went before me maybe I'd be ready... but I see that as a huge argument in favor of immortality since I want people I care about to be alive and healthy

Re: We Need to Die

#72

Post by nice_byte »

I've had this experience a couple years ago where I had to go under for a sudden/unplanned surgery. It felt like I should be worried, but I realized that I was 100% ok with not waking up from that.

We already live so much further past what our lifespan "in the wild" would be. Even ~75yrs is already excruciatingly long. I don't understand people who want to prolong it even further.

Re: We Need to Die

#73

Post by weinzierl »

sph wrote: post #42
weinzierl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, definitely. Should I get bored I could always go about and insult every being that ever lived and will live in the entire universe - in alphabetical order.

I feel that those that would choose immortality are so self-important that they would not get any wiser from their additional time on earth.

Maybe you are overthinking it.

Re: We Need to Die

#74

Post by wat10000 »

GMoromisato wrote: post #56

This is like worrying about the sun going supernova after you've just discovered fire. Yes, eventually Earth will be reduced to a blackened cinder. And yes, if humans managed to live forever, there would be unforeseen (maybe bad) consequences. If I get to live to 200, I still won't worry about it. If I get to live to 1,000, maybe I might start to think about it. Fortunately, by then, I will have had 1,000 years of ex…

I'm in favor of improving longevity, but sometimes there is something to be said for other people dying. Imagine a world where Stalin was still alive and would remain so approximately forever.

I don't think this is a reason to avoid research on aging, but immortal dictators could certainly be a downside.

Re: We Need to Die

#75

Post by Palomides »

munificent wrote: post #44

Derren Brown's book "Happy: Why More or Less Everything Is Fine" (which is much better than the title might lead you to believe) does a very good job exploring the philosophy behind this. The choices we make have meaningful and value in large part because we sacrifice a fraction of our finite time and attention in order to do them. But once you have infinite time, then the value of everything you do becomes zero.

by that logic things done during shorter lives are more valuable, so you should kill everyone as soon as possible to make their lives more meaningful

lotta people in this thread with anti-life beliefs

Re: We Need to Die

#76

Post by XorNot »

tern wrote: post #45

For me, the biggest tell was how frequently older people report feeling completely at peace and ready to die. As my own life progressed, the feeling of novelty became harder to find, and then less important. Grief became easier, death became lighter. As I deepened my investigation into the nature of my own experience, I started to realize that "I" do not exist in the way that I originally assumed, and I started to wo…

> For me, the biggest tell was how frequently older people report feeling completely at peace and ready to die.

That's because it's inevitable and at that point they've been sick or infirm for years to decades.

No one has run the real experiment because they can't: put that person in the body of a healthy 20 year old and see if they still feel that way. Except we already kind of know the answer because we regard being suicidal in your 20s as mental illness.

Re: We Need to Die

#77

Post by mrg3_2013 »

wat10000 wrote: post #74
GMoromisato wrote: post #56

This is like worrying about the sun going supernova after you've just discovered fire. Yes, eventually Earth will be reduced to a blackened cinder. And yes, if humans managed to live forever, there would be unforeseen (maybe bad) consequences. If I get to live to 200, I still won't worry about it. If I get to live to 1,000, maybe I might start to think about it. Fortunately, by then, I will have had 1,000 years of ex…

I'm in favor of improving longevity, but sometimes there is something to be said for other people dying. Imagine a world where Stalin was still alive and would remain so approximately forever. I don't think this is a reason to avoid research on aging, but immortal dictators could certainly be a downside.

Had a chuckle at the mention of Stalin. Made me think. I would also think, the evils would be the one who would badly want to live forever, if an option was presented.

Re: We Need to Die

#78

Post by bee_rider »

CodingJeebus wrote: post #68
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. We’ll stick around as digital ancestor spirits. Just to see how it goes. It's cute to think that simply creating some digital representation of us would be a solution to such a problem when one of the founders of the internet has spoken at length about the dangers of hardware compatibility and media obsolescence putting much of today's data at risk from being inaccessible tomorrow.[0] Nothing,…

Well, thanks I guess. I think it is a cute idea, not a serious one really. At least, I definitely haven’t worked the details.

We’d have to be maintained. Maybe that could be part of the deal. Humans are always changing anyway, so I think we’d couldn’t be left entirely at rest. Maybe we should be run slowly, to just to make sure things are still working. Then we don’t have to worry about at-rest type bitrot.

Re: We Need to Die

#79

Post by delichon »

Widespread failure to die would cement culture in place, and the power structure. It necessarily would dramatically slow down cultural evolution, which strongly depends on funerals. Logan's Run had the right idea, just the wrong number. We old geezers must make way for civilization to effectively adapt to a changing environment.

Even if our lifespans become merely 200 years, imagine if the generation of the US Civil War era were still in power. Great age plus health equals social petrification.

Re: We Need to Die

#80

Post by WA9ACE »

wat10000 wrote: post #69
Waterluvian wrote: post #11

There have been many, many stories over the millenia that try to empart the wisdom that mortality is necessary. Some present it as being a gift. I don't think any one source made it click for me, but I think some combination of watching The Good Place , Sandman , and a lot of Black Mirror got me really stretching my imagination of what it would feel like to be truly immortal. I had a moment that felt like my horizons…

It seems absurd to argue that death is necessary or good when there is exactly zero experience with the alternative. Imagine a society where everyone has a ball and chain permanently attached from birth. It would be just a part of life. Some thinkers might write articles about how much better things would be if a way could be found to get rid of the ball and chain. Others would come up with arguments for why the ball…

Unless such anti-aging style immortality solution was widely available, you would much more likely end up with a situation similar to In Time (2011). The poor fighting for continued survival, while the wealthy live forever.
Post reply on HN