The Expensive Art of Living Forever
topic.com
The Expensive Art of Living Forever
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#2"In a world where a growing class of retired Americans are living in poverty and perpetual, insecure, backbreaking labor during what should be their retirement years, transhumanist visions of a future of “infinite abundance” (We’ll just 3-D-print food! Everyone will move to space!) aren’t inspiring, but perverse. Transhumanists are also almost exclusively white, as is borne out by the older, moneyed demographic at RAADfest. "
I find this attitude tiresome. The author is attempting to shame his subjects for daring to look beyond today's problems and for their demographic makeup. Everything does not have to be looked at via the lens of societal privilege. Can't we just let people dream of the future without saddling them with current day baggage.
“New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common.” ― John Locke
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#3"In a world where a growing class of retired Americans are living in poverty and perpetual, insecure, backbreaking labor during what should be their retirement years, transhumanist visions of a future of “infinite abundance” (We’ll just 3-D-print food! Everyone will move to space!) aren’t inspiring, but perverse. Transhumanists are also almost exclusively white, as is borne out by the older, moneyed demographic at RA…
I think there is good reason to be concerned about moving into a future where the wealthy get to live forever (or at least for a very long time) while the poor live short lives of labor. I don't think the author is saying that what they want is wrong, just that we should think through the implications of such a future when we already have such high inequality.
"The future is already here – it's just not evenly distributed." -William Gibson
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#4I think what dismays me about this article is that it contains exactly the kind of profound vacuity that passes, inexplicably, for wisdom about the possibility and impact of life extension and the character of those who are interested in it. It's difficult to know where to begin.
First, and most glaringly, death is not a solution to overpopulation, in any sense. It hasn't worked so far, for example. Additionally, there was a great video by Numberphile, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpj0E0a0mlU, where he shows that the current 1.1% global growth rate results in us overpopulating the Universe in something like 9000 years. Sooner, rather than later, we will face a real population crisis, even in the face of 80-year lifespans. Growth rates absolutely will come down, one way or the other, in a way that will be functionally indistinguishable from outlawing procreation.
Second, transhumanists, and the subset of truly whacko pseudoscientific transhumanists (however large a fraction you think that is), represents not nearly everybody who is interested in longevity, nor do they characterize, at all, the entirety of those populations. I wouldn't characterize Aubrey de Grey as a transhumanist, for example. The smear doesn't stick, even if we were to allow smear tactics as legitimate.
Third, and finally, there is absolutely no guarantee that life extension technology will be expensive. None. Further, there is no reason to think that its cost would not decline over time, indefinitely. How much could an Alzheimer's vaccine actually cost, once every 50 years, lets say? How expensive could a CRISPR therapy be? If it were routine and assembly-lined? What about the decline in lifestyle cost after one has paid off one's mortgage and taken care of all the other mostly one-time expenses?
As thinkers, we truly need to do much, much better than this article.
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#5"In a world where a growing class of retired Americans are living in poverty and perpetual, insecure, backbreaking labor during what should be their retirement years, transhumanist visions of a future of “infinite abundance” (We’ll just 3-D-print food! Everyone will move to space!) aren’t inspiring, but perverse. Transhumanists are also almost exclusively white, as is borne out by the older, moneyed demographic at RA…
I think there is good reason to be concerned about moving into a future where the wealthy get to live forever (or at least for a very long time) while the poor live short lives of labor. I don't think the author is saying that what they want is wrong, just that we should think through the implications of such a future when we already have such high inequality. "The future is already here – it's just not evenly distri…
The future where only wealthy get to live forever is indeed very bleak, but there is a future worse than that: the one where everyones life is short (like now).
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#6"Advanced artificial intelligence, they hope, will allow us to make exact copies of our minds that will live indefinitely in networked computer systems."
I've never understood this mindset. If I asked you: "hey, here's proof that all the data that comprise your personality, memories, etc. have been copied to a computer, may I now give you a lethal injection?", why on earth would you say "yes"?
It's not the particulars of what I'm experiencing (my memories, my personality, the sensations I call "my body" etc.) that are interesting to me; it's the sheer fact that I experience.
I fear this will degenerate into an unproductive debate about what consciousness is or is not, so maybe it's better to just nod politely.
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#7"In a world where a growing class of retired Americans are living in poverty and perpetual, insecure, backbreaking labor during what should be their retirement years, transhumanist visions of a future of “infinite abundance” (We’ll just 3-D-print food! Everyone will move to space!) aren’t inspiring, but perverse. Transhumanists are also almost exclusively white, as is borne out by the older, moneyed demographic at RA…
> Everything does not have to be looked at via the lens of societal privilege.
I don't mind looking at nearly everything through that lens, even if not exclusively. We probably should think, in general, about differential healthcare outcomes even, and especially, now, for example. What I object to in this case is the smear tactic. "It's just crazy rich white people who are afraid to die." As you say, it's shaming. And, it leads to that other assumption, that this will always only be for rich people. I'm no fan of abject capitalism, but there are rich people who make things cheaper for everybody. Ford didn't own the only automobile, nor Boeing the only airplane. They, and other manufacturers, are interested in bringing costs down in order to get more buyers.
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#8"Advanced artificial intelligence, they hope, will allow us to make exact copies of our minds that will live indefinitely in networked computer systems." I've never understood this mindset. If I asked you: "hey, here's proof that all the data that comprise your personality, memories, etc. have been copied to a computer, may I now give you a lethal injection?", why on earth would you say "yes"? It's not the particular…
The sensations you call your body change over time, until there's nothing but fatigue and pain left. If someone offered to let you resume consciousness on artificial hardware after your body had ceased to function, you might take them up on it.
In fact, some of my eldest relatives are in high spirits but also looking forward to death, because they have religious convictions about a wonderful, energetic, pain-free afterlife.
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#9"Advanced artificial intelligence, they hope, will allow us to make exact copies of our minds that will live indefinitely in networked computer systems." I've never understood this mindset. If I asked you: "hey, here's proof that all the data that comprise your personality, memories, etc. have been copied to a computer, may I now give you a lethal injection?", why on earth would you say "yes"? It's not the particular…
The sensations you call your body change over time, until there's nothing but fatigue and pain left. If someone offered to let you resume consciousness on artificial hardware after your body had ceased to function, you might take them up on it. In fact, some of my eldest relatives are in high spirits but also looking forward to death, because they have religious convictions about a wonderful, energetic, pain-free aft…
If I make a perfectly identical clone of you, and then shoot you dead, will you resume your consciousness in that clone?
Why?
Alternatively, if I shoot the clone, will the clone resume its consciousness in you? By what process?
Re: The Expensive Art of Living Forever
#10I think what dismays me about this article is that it contains exactly the kind of profound vacuity that passes, inexplicably, for wisdom about the possibility and impact of life extension and the character of those who are interested in it. It's difficult to know where to begin. First, and most glaringly, death is not a solution to overpopulation, in any sense. It hasn't worked so far, for example. Additionally, the…
About your 3rd point, recent results (clonal haematopoeisis, single cell genomics) do in fact suggest that life extension interventions will be highly technical, ongoing and very expensive.