2 ms·

We talk a lot (actually, not enough) about the dangers of AI, but we rarely discuss the perils of longevity. Not that they are similar, but both are somewhat un

We talk a lot (actually, not enough) about the dangers of AI, but we rarely discuss the perils of longevity. Not that they are similar, but both are somewhat underrated. - Once there will be a scientific breakthrough in longevity, everything will happen very fast. The time between the first and the billionth vaccine against ageing probably won't be much longer than one year. - The breakthrough may be just around the corner (10, 20 30 years...) - many people seem to be putting their money on it. - Sudden increase in the average lifespan by as little as 10 years would throw most pension funds and state budgets into disarray. Mind you, a 70 years old retiree rejuvenated back to his 60 won't be magically as productive as she was before she retired. She will be unemployed and 10 years behind on everything. - Any significant lifespan enhancement will mean we have to renegotiate social contract about having kids. Will the vaccine come with strings attached? We can't even control our population explosion today. - Not just science progresses one funeral at a time.(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30025879 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30025879). Imagine having no real possibility progressing in your career, once the "best" will fill the ladder. Would you want your judge or police chief to be the same person for 50 years? PS: That being said, I don't think we can or should hold back and it will be all worth it.

godelski 5y ago
I think several of these are solved. Though pensions is a difficult one but they aren't nearly as common as they used to be. If you live forever you can learn a new skill. There's also an incentive to get to financial independence. Population isn't an issue and I'm confused why this is frequently brought up. But then again people think America is over populated while it's extremely population sparse. The truth is that every first world country has birth rates well below replacement. Most developing countries do too or are on their way. Countries where people live longer and have education have declining populations. It's wouldn't be surprising if people who were immortal didn't have kids until they were able to reach financial independence. Be that in their 90's or 900's. I also don't think people will want to do the same jobs forever. We have infinite time. It's okay if it takes 50 years of schooling and 50 years to become a Sr engineer. Time is different. It's also more incentive for automation so little can just live.

godelski 5y ago

I think several of these are solved. Though pensions is a difficult one but they aren't nearly as common as they used to be. If you live forever you can learn a new skill. There's also an incentive to get to financial independence. Population isn't an issue and I'm confused why this is frequently brought up. But then again people think America is over populated while it's extremely population sparse. The truth is that every first world country has birth rates well below replacement. Most developing countries do too or are on their way. Countries where people live longer and have education have declining populations. It's wouldn't be surprising if people who were immortal didn't have kids until they were able to reach financial independence. Be that in their 90's or 900's. I also don't think people will want to do the same jobs forever. We have infinite time. It's okay if it takes 50 years of schooling and 50 years to become a Sr engineer. Time is different. It's also more incentive for automation so little can just live.