5 ms·

Age-related diseases and dying from old age is the tip of the iceberg. A much more important part is how the behavior/personality changes with age. We start out

Age-related diseases and dying from old age is the tip of the iceberg. A much more important part is how the behavior/personality changes with age. We start out foolish and energetic, trying things out, making mistakes and creating new neural connections at the peak rate. Towards the 30s, we slow down, rely more on experience, most of newly learned things are recombinations and abstractions on top of the things learned earlier. Once we approach the end of the life, we become much more risk-averse, hesitant to wander off known paths, and grasping fundamentally new concepts becomes nearly impossible. Remember making fun of all those pensioners still using dial-up? It is likely related to the limited capacity of the human brain and I doubt it could be easily worked around. Generational change and the limitless supply of the generation Z, willing to break things and learn from their mistakes, is what propelled humanity out of the caves and made civilization possible. I don't think killing it off in the name of abstract longevity would be a wise idea...

vmception 5y ago
I would contend that human behavior is primarily driven by incentives If people dont have to “act older” which includes relying on experiencs and having those experiences to begin with, they wont at the same distribution We already see this in play generationally and cities where there are options
kvee 5y ago
We can always improve our brains
GhettoComputers 5y ago
Easily explained through hormones
keyle 5y ago
I'm indeed a strong believer that if we could live forever, the suicide rate would be high, very high. There is only so much a human mind can get through. Think of all the bad things that can happen to someone in their lives, mental scaring is real. At some point, something is going to snap. Only vein people would actually keep going forever. Most normal people would give in at some point having had enough. That said, extending life to 200-300 years would be good. I just think that forever would make everyone bat shit crazy and murdering each other or having suicide parties.
- zoul 5y ago
  This is the topic of The Makropulos Affair by Karel Čapek and the related opera by Leoš Janáček: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Makropulos_Affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Makropulos_Affair
- rl3 5y ago
  >That said, extending life to 200-300 years would be good. I just think that forever would make everyone bat shit crazy and murdering each other or having suicide parties. The invitations for those would be sick: "A party to die for." RSVP by the year 2600.
- taneq 5y ago
  If we could eliminate death by senescence, accident and deliberate external violence, suicide is just about the only thing left and so on a long enough time scale would automatically be 100%.
- probably_wrong 5y ago
  > Think of all the bad things that can happen to someone in their lives, mental scaring is real. At some point, something is going to snap. I think it would be the other way around - at some point you would kill yourself out of boredom. As someone put it: when you are a child, you regularly live the worst day of your life. The first time you drop your ice-cream it is quite likely your worst day so far. The 30th time? Not so much. By the time you lose your 5000th friend, you are probably not as shocked as the first time.
  - keyle 5y ago
    Good point, that's the other way to see it. But think of people that have been through war, rape and famine? You are right a vast majority of people would become completely apathetic to anything happening around them, similar to how we feel about things happening on other continent sometimes. I'll make a note you and I discuss this in 800 years and see who's right?
    - mensetmanusman 5y ago
bradlys 5y ago
> It is likely related to the limited capacity of the human brain I really doubt this. It is likely limited to, "why change when what I did got me here so far". That and the belief that they'll die sooner than later anyway so why bother. Once you took away the idea that people will die and remain healthy in all ways - I think you'll see folks be much more open to adopting change at later stages in life. I see this with many people I know who are in their 60s. They're like, "Eh, it's too late. Gonna die sooner than later anyway." It's only the ones who think they're gonna live at least another 10 years (and realize how long that is) actually are open to changing.
- john_moscow 5y ago
  I think, it's more gradual. The older you are, the more effort it takes to learn new things. Most people eventually get frustrated and give up. A few that don't, show much better results compared to their peers. But I doubt they could outcompete an equally determined youngster. One notable example would be moving to a country with a different language. School-age kids become native speakers in terms of years with little effort, while doing it in your 60s requires tremendous effort to get the most basic communication going.
  - mahkeiro 5y ago
    School kids are forced to become bilingual. Every single interaction they have during the day must be in another language. The 60s year old something has most of the time limited interaction during the day with the other language. That's the main reason. A simple example, in my area we have multiple "international school" teaching only in english. I can tell you that most of the kids are far to be called bilingual in French. The other day I was in front of a group of them trying to see who would be able to order in French at the Starbuck. And this is not because they don't have French lessons, they have plenty. One of my friend is born and raised in Switzerland but only attended english schools and lived in an english speaking family, his level of French is far far from being bilingual.
  - mellavora 5y ago
    > The older you are, the more effort it takes to learn new things. My experience has been the opposite. Learning is also a skill, and at this point I am extremely accomplished at it. > School-age kids become native speakers in terms of years with little effort Often repeated, but doubtful. School-age children burn through incredible amounts of energy per body mass. There is almost nothing they do which is "little effort". Probably originated because children (and adults) learn best through play, which is biologically how animals are designed to learn. But somehow "play" doesn't count as "effort"
demadog 5y ago
Sample size of 1: my gramps is 105 and yes he follows many of the same routines you mention but he shows curiosity in the web work I do and asks better questions than my boomer parents and aunts. So I think it may be more outlook and aptitude than purely age.
- jgilias 5y ago
  My gramps didn't get that far. Passed away when he was 92. However. He'd always bug me (not that I was actually bugged) with questions about how computers and the internet work. The guy also built a radio receiver as a teenager purely from getting a grasp on the underlying physics from school physics books. According to him the hardest part was actually getting his hands on a suitable oscillator. Eventually he got into a little bit of trouble with that, as he was 'receiving radio broadcasts without a license'. So, yeah, a legend and an inspiration. I miss him. Make it a sample size of 2 then.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    I discovered I could make a radio receiver by simply attaching a long wire to the phono input on the record player.
    - mhh__ 5y ago
      I discovered that the cable to a boom mic seemed to be picking up a radio station mid-production when I used to do AudioVisual stuff when I was in school. Muted it so fast I almost broke the slider.
grishka 5y ago
No, I don't think so. Human behavior is influenced by the supposedly finite lifespan a lot. I'm in my late 20s now. Many of the people around me are, as I would say, "in a hurry to live their lives". They now plan decades ahead, they set deadlines for getting married, having kids and such, they stop traveling, they willingly sacrifice themselves, and explain it all like "it'll be too late if not now". They act their age. This pressure from impending death of old age is absolutely real and it shapes the society in extremely significant ways. That said, I hope to live forever and refuse to "act my age".
- tm-guimaraes 5y ago
  > refuse to "act my age". If you plan on having biological kids, that is not so easy. The risk of a pregnancy complications past 30yo rises a lot. Planing the life around a timeframe where you get both financial stability and the youthful body to carry a child is extremely important, specially for woman.
  - grishka 5y ago
    > If you plan on having biological kids I do not, having a child is kind of a worst nightmare for me. And I'm male. Oh and by the way. Many, many people consider kids a form of immortality. The "someone to leave in this world after I'm gone". The whole idea of "leaving something behind after yourself" is so crazy to me, and spending your best years (again, pay attention to how much aging influences everything including language) on raising a child to leave behind is just... So, yes, decisions whether to have kids at all are also not insubstantially driven by the impending death.
    - nradov 5y ago
      The idea of worrying about individual consciousness and memories is so crazy to me. What matters is preserving our genes and culture. I have children so I am effectively immortal.
      - grishka 5y ago

vmception 5y ago

I would contend that human behavior is primarily driven by incentives If people dont have to “act older” which includes relying on experiencs and having those experiences to begin with, they wont at the same distribution We already see this in play generationally and cities where there are options

kvee 5y ago

We can always improve our brains

GhettoComputers 5y ago

Easily explained through hormones

keyle 5y ago

I'm indeed a strong believer that if we could live forever, the suicide rate would be high, very high. There is only so much a human mind can get through. Think of all the bad things that can happen to someone in their lives, mental scaring is real. At some point, something is going to snap. Only vein people would actually keep going forever. Most normal people would give in at some point having had enough. That said, extending life to 200-300 years would be good. I just think that forever would make everyone bat shit crazy and murdering each other or having suicide parties.

zoul 5y ago
This is the topic of The Makropulos Affair by Karel Čapek and the related opera by Leoš Janáček: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Makropulos_Affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Makropulos_Affair
rl3 5y ago
>That said, extending life to 200-300 years would be good. I just think that forever would make everyone bat shit crazy and murdering each other or having suicide parties. The invitations for those would be sick: "A party to die for." RSVP by the year 2600.
taneq 5y ago
If we could eliminate death by senescence, accident and deliberate external violence, suicide is just about the only thing left and so on a long enough time scale would automatically be 100%.
probably_wrong 5y ago
> Think of all the bad things that can happen to someone in their lives, mental scaring is real. At some point, something is going to snap. I think it would be the other way around - at some point you would kill yourself out of boredom. As someone put it: when you are a child, you regularly live the worst day of your life. The first time you drop your ice-cream it is quite likely your worst day so far. The 30th time? Not so much. By the time you lose your 5000th friend, you are probably not as shocked as the first time.
- keyle 5y ago
  Good point, that's the other way to see it. But think of people that have been through war, rape and famine? You are right a vast majority of people would become completely apathetic to anything happening around them, similar to how we feel about things happening on other continent sometimes. I'll make a note you and I discuss this in 800 years and see who's right?
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago

bradlys 5y ago

> It is likely related to the limited capacity of the human brain I really doubt this. It is likely limited to, "why change when what I did got me here so far". That and the belief that they'll die sooner than later anyway so why bother. Once you took away the idea that people will die and remain healthy in all ways - I think you'll see folks be much more open to adopting change at later stages in life. I see this with many people I know who are in their 60s. They're like, "Eh, it's too late. Gonna die sooner than later anyway." It's only the ones who think they're gonna live at least another 10 years (and realize how long that is) actually are open to changing.

john_moscow 5y ago
I think, it's more gradual. The older you are, the more effort it takes to learn new things. Most people eventually get frustrated and give up. A few that don't, show much better results compared to their peers. But I doubt they could outcompete an equally determined youngster. One notable example would be moving to a country with a different language. School-age kids become native speakers in terms of years with little effort, while doing it in your 60s requires tremendous effort to get the most basic communication going.
- mahkeiro 5y ago
  School kids are forced to become bilingual. Every single interaction they have during the day must be in another language. The 60s year old something has most of the time limited interaction during the day with the other language. That's the main reason. A simple example, in my area we have multiple "international school" teaching only in english. I can tell you that most of the kids are far to be called bilingual in French. The other day I was in front of a group of them trying to see who would be able to order in French at the Starbuck. And this is not because they don't have French lessons, they have plenty. One of my friend is born and raised in Switzerland but only attended english schools and lived in an english speaking family, his level of French is far far from being bilingual.
- mellavora 5y ago
  > The older you are, the more effort it takes to learn new things. My experience has been the opposite. Learning is also a skill, and at this point I am extremely accomplished at it. > School-age kids become native speakers in terms of years with little effort Often repeated, but doubtful. School-age children burn through incredible amounts of energy per body mass. There is almost nothing they do which is "little effort". Probably originated because children (and adults) learn best through play, which is biologically how animals are designed to learn. But somehow "play" doesn't count as "effort"

demadog 5y ago

Sample size of 1: my gramps is 105 and yes he follows many of the same routines you mention but he shows curiosity in the web work I do and asks better questions than my boomer parents and aunts. So I think it may be more outlook and aptitude than purely age.

jgilias 5y ago
My gramps didn't get that far. Passed away when he was 92. However. He'd always bug me (not that I was actually bugged) with questions about how computers and the internet work. The guy also built a radio receiver as a teenager purely from getting a grasp on the underlying physics from school physics books. According to him the hardest part was actually getting his hands on a suitable oscillator. Eventually he got into a little bit of trouble with that, as he was 'receiving radio broadcasts without a license'. So, yeah, a legend and an inspiration. I miss him. Make it a sample size of 2 then.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  I discovered I could make a radio receiver by simply attaching a long wire to the phono input on the record player.
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    I discovered that the cable to a boom mic seemed to be picking up a radio station mid-production when I used to do AudioVisual stuff when I was in school. Muted it so fast I almost broke the slider.

grishka 5y ago

No, I don't think so. Human behavior is influenced by the supposedly finite lifespan a lot. I'm in my late 20s now. Many of the people around me are, as I would say, "in a hurry to live their lives". They now plan decades ahead, they set deadlines for getting married, having kids and such, they stop traveling, they willingly sacrifice themselves, and explain it all like "it'll be too late if not now". They act their age. This pressure from impending death of old age is absolutely real and it shapes the society in extremely significant ways. That said, I hope to live forever and refuse to "act my age".

tm-guimaraes 5y ago
> refuse to "act my age". If you plan on having biological kids, that is not so easy. The risk of a pregnancy complications past 30yo rises a lot. Planing the life around a timeframe where you get both financial stability and the youthful body to carry a child is extremely important, specially for woman.
- grishka 5y ago
  > If you plan on having biological kids I do not, having a child is kind of a worst nightmare for me. And I'm male. Oh and by the way. Many, many people consider kids a form of immortality. The "someone to leave in this world after I'm gone". The whole idea of "leaving something behind after yourself" is so crazy to me, and spending your best years (again, pay attention to how much aging influences everything including language) on raising a child to leave behind is just... So, yes, decisions whether to have kids at all are also not insubstantially driven by the impending death.
  - nradov 5y ago
    The idea of worrying about individual consciousness and memories is so crazy to me. What matters is preserving our genes and culture. I have children so I am effectively immortal.
    - grishka 5y ago