5 ms·

On the contrary the position of most people seems to be knee-jerk opposition to any possibility of extending life indefinitely. It's always a good idea to appl

On the contrary the position of most people seems to be knee-jerk opposition to any possibility of extending life indefinitely. It's always a good idea to apply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversal_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversal_test. Given you lived in a world where death was a choice, would you prefer to take that away?

astazangasta 10y ago
I was barely able to understand what the Internet would do to the world, and still don't. You're asking me to successfully imagine the consequences of ending death, and then apply a 'reversal test' in that society? This methodology is too difficult.
ylhert 10y ago
Using the reversal test: I imagine living in an overcrowded world whose population was out of control with nothing to cull its growth. With resources running out, and we had the opportunity to slowly and 'naturally' phase out individuals to reduce the population (read: dying of natural causes as people do now), then yes, I would prefer that.
- nhaliday 10y ago
  At the moment the majority of the developed world is suffering from underpopulation and an aging population. Immortality would change that but I expect by the time we figure actual immortality out we'll have either gotten off the planet or figured out brain uploads (this is what I imagine applying the reversal test to). In both those cases overpopulation is not a significant problem. In the mid-term we're much more likely to see life extension and staving off dementia, and that would be helpful to countries struggling to sustain a workforce.
  - astazangasta 10y ago
    1) We're not getting off this planet for centuries, if ever. Don't hold your breath. Doing this is MUCH harder than solving immortality, which probably is about as difficult as patching some stem cells. 2) Brain uploads are dumb. Let me ask you this: I create a 'brain upload' program, run it on you, and tell you, "OK, now your brain is uploaded!" Will you walk willingly into a blender? You are your body. It does not matter what sort of digital derivative has been made of you, your subjective experience is tied to your corpse.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      > 1) We're not getting off this planet for centuries, if ever. Don't hold your breath. Doing this is MUCH harder than solving immortality, which probably is about as difficult as patching some stem cells. It's not harder, it's much easier. Hell, it's somewhat within our current technological capabilities. It's just expensive and we have zero economic incentive to do it.
      - astazangasta 10y ago
        Sure, we can blast off and die in space of cold and asphyxiation. I assumed this meant 'move to inhabit another planet indefinitely in a manner that does not suck'.
        TeMPOraL 10y ago
        I meant exactly that. We are technologically advanced enough to blast off to Mars and build a permanent settlement there. We just don't have the will (as measured in money - the unit of caring). Would the colony suck? Initially, probably yes. But hey, if we were to suddenly hit immortality tomorrow, we have enough space in deserts and oceans to inhabit before going to Mars that we'll be experts in self-contained settlements by the time colony ship reaches red planet's surface.
        eropple 10y ago
        There is the "does not suck" part to consider, though. I have a hard time thinking of any parameters in which a current or nearish-future self-contained settlement would not, across many parameters, suck. Maybe it's a failure of imagination, but...I dunno.
        Vraxx 10y ago
        I'm inclined to believe that the "sucking" part of it is a consequence of new technology and capabilities. It's rarely the case that something that is done for the first time is even remotely comparable in quality to the mass marketed refined implementation of that thing. No matter what our technological capabilities are at the time of doing so, I believe the first colonies on other planets will "suck" by the standards of living of that era.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  One thing about that hypothetical world - we would have a strong economical incentive to expand inwards and outwards - to start underwater settlements, to turn deserts into habitable, arable lands, to build Mars colonies and Venus cloud cities. Those things aren't beyond our technological capabilities now, we just have no strong incentive to do them.
  - mulcahey 10y ago
    And to just be more thrifty with our resources in general.
  - qbrass 10y ago
    >...to build Mars colonies and Venus cloud cities. That doesn't solve the problem on Earth, it only spreads it across the solar system.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      It's logical, it's clear - there's only one way to go from here. Without a doubt, the only way to go from here is out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab_mH8R0KTM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab_mH8R0KTM http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Julia_Ecklar:One_Way_To_Go http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Julia_Ecklar:One_Way_To_Go
- astazangasta 10y ago
  I imagine we'd just end up with some sort of extreme aversion to reproducing. It's not hard to imagine - many people don't even care to reproduce now, and fertility rates in advanced countries are sometimes below replacement fertility levels. The replacement rate drops dramatically when you can stop aging and most forms of death, but I imagine that if you always had the body of a 22-year old Olympic athlete, you might be less interested in having children. You might even develop an ethos like buying organic food or being vegetarian - it's gauche to have children once you're taking stem cell patches.

astazangasta 10y ago

I was barely able to understand what the Internet would do to the world, and still don't. You're asking me to successfully imagine the consequences of ending death, and then apply a 'reversal test' in that society? This methodology is too difficult.

ylhert 10y ago

Using the reversal test: I imagine living in an overcrowded world whose population was out of control with nothing to cull its growth. With resources running out, and we had the opportunity to slowly and 'naturally' phase out individuals to reduce the population (read: dying of natural causes as people do now), then yes, I would prefer that.

nhaliday 10y ago
At the moment the majority of the developed world is suffering from underpopulation and an aging population. Immortality would change that but I expect by the time we figure actual immortality out we'll have either gotten off the planet or figured out brain uploads (this is what I imagine applying the reversal test to). In both those cases overpopulation is not a significant problem. In the mid-term we're much more likely to see life extension and staving off dementia, and that would be helpful to countries struggling to sustain a workforce.
- astazangasta 10y ago
  1) We're not getting off this planet for centuries, if ever. Don't hold your breath. Doing this is MUCH harder than solving immortality, which probably is about as difficult as patching some stem cells. 2) Brain uploads are dumb. Let me ask you this: I create a 'brain upload' program, run it on you, and tell you, "OK, now your brain is uploaded!" Will you walk willingly into a blender? You are your body. It does not matter what sort of digital derivative has been made of you, your subjective experience is tied to your corpse.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    > 1) We're not getting off this planet for centuries, if ever. Don't hold your breath. Doing this is MUCH harder than solving immortality, which probably is about as difficult as patching some stem cells. It's not harder, it's much easier. Hell, it's somewhat within our current technological capabilities. It's just expensive and we have zero economic incentive to do it.
    - astazangasta 10y ago
      Sure, we can blast off and die in space of cold and asphyxiation. I assumed this meant 'move to inhabit another planet indefinitely in a manner that does not suck'.
      - TeMPOraL 10y ago
        I meant exactly that. We are technologically advanced enough to blast off to Mars and build a permanent settlement there. We just don't have the will (as measured in money - the unit of caring). Would the colony suck? Initially, probably yes. But hey, if we were to suddenly hit immortality tomorrow, we have enough space in deserts and oceans to inhabit before going to Mars that we'll be experts in self-contained settlements by the time colony ship reaches red planet's surface.
        eropple 10y ago
        There is the "does not suck" part to consider, though. I have a hard time thinking of any parameters in which a current or nearish-future self-contained settlement would not, across many parameters, suck. Maybe it's a failure of imagination, but...I dunno.
        Vraxx 10y ago
        I'm inclined to believe that the "sucking" part of it is a consequence of new technology and capabilities. It's rarely the case that something that is done for the first time is even remotely comparable in quality to the mass marketed refined implementation of that thing. No matter what our technological capabilities are at the time of doing so, I believe the first colonies on other planets will "suck" by the standards of living of that era.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
One thing about that hypothetical world - we would have a strong economical incentive to expand inwards and outwards - to start underwater settlements, to turn deserts into habitable, arable lands, to build Mars colonies and Venus cloud cities. Those things aren't beyond our technological capabilities now, we just have no strong incentive to do them.
- mulcahey 10y ago
  And to just be more thrifty with our resources in general.
- qbrass 10y ago
  >...to build Mars colonies and Venus cloud cities. That doesn't solve the problem on Earth, it only spreads it across the solar system.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    It's logical, it's clear - there's only one way to go from here. Without a doubt, the only way to go from here is out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab_mH8R0KTM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab_mH8R0KTM http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Julia_Ecklar:One_Way_To_Go http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Julia_Ecklar:One_Way_To_Go
astazangasta 10y ago
I imagine we'd just end up with some sort of extreme aversion to reproducing. It's not hard to imagine - many people don't even care to reproduce now, and fertility rates in advanced countries are sometimes below replacement fertility levels. The replacement rate drops dramatically when you can stop aging and most forms of death, but I imagine that if you always had the body of a 22-year old Olympic athlete, you might be less interested in having children. You might even develop an ethos like buying organic food or being vegetarian - it's gauche to have children once you're taking stem cell patches.