7 ms·

Surprise, a counter-argument on hacker news! :) Why does it seem no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of de

by patcon 7y ago

Surprise, a counter-argument on hacker news! :) Why does it seem no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of death. It's a network characteristic selected for in living system, and very few creatures have survived into our epoch without developing the capacity to die. It's literally an evolved feature of our lifecycle and our existence within this web, and it terrifies me (esp everything going wrong already in our world) that we're not being more critical and cautionary toward life-extension.... Every time I read about life extension, I have almost zero positive thoughts about its effect on our common good, and it's just "oh shit, this is going to have bad outcomes for us all" :/ It's pursuit feels like peak selfishness in our individualistic society, one that really need collectivist thinking.

nickthemagicman 7y ago
Evolution is not always correct. Evolution is correct only for a certain set of circumstances at a certain point in time. Appendixes are an example of legacy evolutionary artifacts. Evolution keeps...evolving. So one could argue that mortality is a legacy evolutionary process and by overcoming it humans are evolving as a species. Think of all one could accomplish if dedicated 1000 years of learning and research to developing fusion for example or space travel.
- excursionist 7y ago
  I'm not sure our brains are capable of continuously learning for 1000 years without becoming useless. Also, there is a dystopian version of immortality - a tiny fraction of elites becoming immortal super-tyrants.
  - nickthemagicman 7y ago
    If we solve aging we may solve brain aging as well as one is a subset of the other.
- smolder 7y ago
  Appendixes have recently started to be regarded as something functional, a sort of incubator for healthy gut bacteria, but I'm sure there are other examples in nature that could support your point, too.
excursionist 7y ago
> it terrifies me (esp everything going wrong already in our world) that we're not being more critical and cautionary toward life-extension.... Don't worry bro, you'll die and all your fears will go away :). From a personal point of view biological immortality would be great, but I think you're right that there are risks - I can imagine a world where a tiny fraction of wealthy/powerful people make themselves into immortal super-tyrants.
kennyadam 7y ago
People don't want to die, I think it's as simple as that.
gitanovic 7y ago
Simply because we reached a state where we can. And also, we evolved a brain that led us here, so why not?
melling 7y ago
You’re kidding, right? These conversations frequently tend to devolve into a long discussion about the negative on hacker news. In fact, 3 years ago I wrote that this story should be banned from HN: https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/stories-that-should-be-banned-from-hacker-news-immortality/ https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/stories-that-should-... “Death gives life meaning” “It’ll only be for rich people” “The money should be spent on something better.” If we spent as much time trying to solve the problem, rather than having philosophical discussions, we’d all probably be living to 200 by now.
- saiya-jin 7y ago
  So you wrote your opinion on some blog... doesn't make it any more relevant than any other opinion, here, there, anywhere. This is a public forum. Death is an interesting topic, plenty of people are scared shitless of it, regardless of their beliefs. Many wish that they would be that special spark that will live almost forever, ideally young, but god forbids that everybody else with them gets the same chance (simple math indicates that would be a bit of catastrophe for whole ecosystem and ultimately mankind too these days). Research should be definitely done, results might help in places like space travel and probably some diseases, but I don't see it as something super important currently. Maybe because I am at peace with my inevitable death, so other things are considered as higher priority (say pollution, global climate change, inequality, f@cking wars).
  - melling 7y ago
    I wrote it in a blog so I don’t have to keep repeating myself. The conversation is basically the same every time. I also addressed your common complaint that there are more important things to work on. Having the same conversation over and over again with the same result probably qualifies under the “definition of insanity”
  - UnFleshedOne 7y ago
    What's wrong with all those higher priority items exactly?
- patcon 7y ago
TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
Perhaps if we had many more years of useful life we’d learn to take more care because we’d live to see the long term results of our choices.
- patcon 7y ago
  I truly love the optimism, but even our experiences in democracy don't seem to support this. [1] Plus, does what you're saying even feel true in your own life now? Does knowing something in your youth make you a louder or better or more powerful advocate in a far future. Slow catastrophies are a human blind spot, and I lack your confidence that extending our individual window from 80 to 120 years would make us better able to grapple. Especially considering that those additional 60 years are going to have a much more stubborn and formed and fully-convicted mind piloting the body around. [1]: Ch 6 of "Democracy for Realists", "The Specious Present" https://books.google.ca/books?id=M4m9DgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=democracy+for+realists&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiEnM_b4vbmAhVFnOAKHcF7A1cQ6AEIKTAA#v=snippet&q=louis%20uchitelle%20(2004)&f=false https://books.google.ca/books?id=M4m9DgAAQBAJ&printsec=front...
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    To be honest, I probably agree more with what you’ve written than what I wrote.
seer 7y ago
CGP gray's videos on YouTube are maybe the most concise and fun to watch materials I've seen on the subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25qzDhGLx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25qzDhGLx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY And you'll be surprised how many people _are_ indeed thinking about all of the outcomes. Have in mind though that as with any technology it is not good or bad, and if it is possible someone will do it sooner or later. It makes no sense to not do it as your adversaries will, and then they'll dictate how it is used, probably not to your liking. If you develop it first you can talk and deliberate at your leisure and find solutions that look much better to you and yours.
brlewis 7y ago
> no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of death Haven't we already disrupted it with spears to ward off predators, and more recently, hand soap and vaccines?
rsynnott 7y ago
> Why does it seem no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of death Well, we've disrupted pretty much everything else, by inventing modern society. What's one more thing?

by patcon 7y ago

nickthemagicman 7y ago

Evolution is not always correct. Evolution is correct only for a certain set of circumstances at a certain point in time. Appendixes are an example of legacy evolutionary artifacts. Evolution keeps...evolving. So one could argue that mortality is a legacy evolutionary process and by overcoming it humans are evolving as a species. Think of all one could accomplish if dedicated 1000 years of learning and research to developing fusion for example or space travel.

excursionist 7y ago
I'm not sure our brains are capable of continuously learning for 1000 years without becoming useless. Also, there is a dystopian version of immortality - a tiny fraction of elites becoming immortal super-tyrants.
- nickthemagicman 7y ago
  If we solve aging we may solve brain aging as well as one is a subset of the other.
smolder 7y ago
Appendixes have recently started to be regarded as something functional, a sort of incubator for healthy gut bacteria, but I'm sure there are other examples in nature that could support your point, too.

excursionist 7y ago

> it terrifies me (esp everything going wrong already in our world) that we're not being more critical and cautionary toward life-extension.... Don't worry bro, you'll die and all your fears will go away :). From a personal point of view biological immortality would be great, but I think you're right that there are risks - I can imagine a world where a tiny fraction of wealthy/powerful people make themselves into immortal super-tyrants.

kennyadam 7y ago

People don't want to die, I think it's as simple as that.

gitanovic 7y ago

Simply because we reached a state where we can. And also, we evolved a brain that led us here, so why not?

melling 7y ago

You’re kidding, right? These conversations frequently tend to devolve into a long discussion about the negative on hacker news. In fact, 3 years ago I wrote that this story should be banned from HN: https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/stories-that-should-be-banned-from-hacker-news-immortality/ https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/stories-that-should-... “Death gives life meaning” “It’ll only be for rich people” “The money should be spent on something better.” If we spent as much time trying to solve the problem, rather than having philosophical discussions, we’d all probably be living to 200 by now.

saiya-jin 7y ago
So you wrote your opinion on some blog... doesn't make it any more relevant than any other opinion, here, there, anywhere. This is a public forum. Death is an interesting topic, plenty of people are scared shitless of it, regardless of their beliefs. Many wish that they would be that special spark that will live almost forever, ideally young, but god forbids that everybody else with them gets the same chance (simple math indicates that would be a bit of catastrophe for whole ecosystem and ultimately mankind too these days). Research should be definitely done, results might help in places like space travel and probably some diseases, but I don't see it as something super important currently. Maybe because I am at peace with my inevitable death, so other things are considered as higher priority (say pollution, global climate change, inequality, f@cking wars).
- melling 7y ago
  I wrote it in a blog so I don’t have to keep repeating myself. The conversation is basically the same every time. I also addressed your common complaint that there are more important things to work on. Having the same conversation over and over again with the same result probably qualifies under the “definition of insanity”
- UnFleshedOne 7y ago
  What's wrong with all those higher priority items exactly?
patcon 7y ago

TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago

Perhaps if we had many more years of useful life we’d learn to take more care because we’d live to see the long term results of our choices.

patcon 7y ago
I truly love the optimism, but even our experiences in democracy don't seem to support this. [1] Plus, does what you're saying even feel true in your own life now? Does knowing something in your youth make you a louder or better or more powerful advocate in a far future. Slow catastrophies are a human blind spot, and I lack your confidence that extending our individual window from 80 to 120 years would make us better able to grapple. Especially considering that those additional 60 years are going to have a much more stubborn and formed and fully-convicted mind piloting the body around. [1]: Ch 6 of "Democracy for Realists", "The Specious Present" https://books.google.ca/books?id=M4m9DgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=democracy+for+realists&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiEnM_b4vbmAhVFnOAKHcF7A1cQ6AEIKTAA#v=snippet&q=louis%20uchitelle%20(2004)&f=false https://books.google.ca/books?id=M4m9DgAAQBAJ&printsec=front...
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  To be honest, I probably agree more with what you’ve written than what I wrote.

seer 7y ago

CGP gray's videos on YouTube are maybe the most concise and fun to watch materials I've seen on the subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25qzDhGLx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25qzDhGLx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY And you'll be surprised how many people _are_ indeed thinking about all of the outcomes. Have in mind though that as with any technology it is not good or bad, and if it is possible someone will do it sooner or later. It makes no sense to not do it as your adversaries will, and then they'll dictate how it is used, probably not to your liking. If you develop it first you can talk and deliberate at your leisure and find solutions that look much better to you and yours.

brlewis 7y ago

> no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of death Haven't we already disrupted it with spears to ward off predators, and more recently, hand soap and vaccines?

rsynnott 7y ago

> Why does it seem no one worries about what we might break in humanity by disrupting the evolved pattern of death Well, we've disrupted pretty much everything else, by inventing modern society. What's one more thing?