6 ms·

All the public companies backed are now down badly. - METACRINE -92% (1 year) - Unity biotechnology -86% (1 year) - DECIBEL THERAPEUTICS -80% (1 year) - PRE

• jacquesm 5y ago
  Of course they are. It's so far beyond our current understanding of aging that there is no way that you are going to turn this into applied science today. These are at best open research problems and they will likely be so for many years to come. Assuming we don't collectively kill ourselves first.
  • culi 5y ago
    Perhaps its not necessarily a bad thing that there's a delay in this type of research. Given the extreme inequality in the world today, it might end up really hard to overcome the way that that inequality manifests itself with regards to access to these types of medicine/research. Even your own comment hinted that perhaps we have some more pressing issues to figure out first
    • adamisom 5y ago
      I’ve always suspected this sentiment to exist somewhere— essentially “death is the great equalizer (and thus good)”—but don’t think I’ve seen it until now. It’s always been obvious to me that the problem with singular focus on inequality is precisely this — the easiest way for everyone to be equal is to be dead. This is appalling and a strong argument against a singular focus on inequality. I would say the same thing about wealth. The easiest way for everyone to be equal is for everyone to be poor. So, make sure your preferred economic policies don’t follow this adverse incentive and just “cut the tall grasses”, so to speak, and just make everyone poor and/or limit upward mobility.
      • culi 5y ago
        I never made such a statement. I never said death makes people equal I don't see how my argument is any different from the arguments about us not being ready for general AI because of how much it could concentrate power.
        • adamisom 5y ago
          Sorry for misstating you. It does seem bad if only some have the tech. Maybe in the worst case, rich nations lock others out? That just seems implausible to me, I think any such medicine tech would be shared without delay. With general AI, I think that’s a tech that would not be fully shared and would stay concentrated.
        • krageon 5y ago
          > us not being ready for [thing] because of how much it could concentrate power. Power is already concentrated, such an advancement would not change the indelible fact that we've reinvented kings and dynasties and we can't seem to get rid of them. Given that life has gotten better for everyone anyway when we discover great things, such concerns must be seen as immaterial. Improving the life of all people is more important.
    • krageon 5y ago
      I'd take a world in which immortality is possible over one where it is not, even if I have to work very hard and do questionable things to get it.
• ericmcer 5y ago
  The investing strategy for longevity companies is probably 49/50 have -90% returns but the you can't miss the one that actually achieves something.
  • gw67 5y ago
    If you have 50 stocks equally weighted: - 49 stock -90% - 1 stock 10x Final portofolio is (0.1 * 49 + 10 * 1)/50 = 0.29 or -71%
    • prakhar897 5y ago
      Do you think the stock will go 10x or 100000000x. Every single human on the planet needs only what only u can provide. Do the math again. Also its not 1 in 50 but 1 in 50000