The weak point in the cryonics movement, in my view, is this: 1) The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is be

The weak point in the cryonics movement, in my view, is this: 1) The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years. 2) The average life expectancy of a civil government is only slightly longer, at a few hundred years (not a lot of data points, admittedly). 3) Cryopreservation is resource-intensive and requires frequent interventions (e.g. needs to be actively maintained, no passive storage solutions). Taken together, it's doubtful that humans can create institutions long-lived enough to accomplish uninterrupted cryopreservation for any real amount of time. Therefore if humans actually do achieve singularity or end aging at any point in the future, it will most likely be only that generation of humans (or some subset) that enjoy the benefits. The amount of time preceding that moment during which it would be possible to achieve human preservation uninterrupted by the demise of necessary institutions such as companies and governments, is likely to be short, or possibly fully within the life expectancy at that time (everyone born at the start of the era of stability that leads to the "end of death" will be saved from death; people born during the prior era could not have been revived anyway due to the lack of stable institutions to preserve the bodies).