4 ms·

I've wondered if in the next 20 years they will learn to extend life 10 years, and in those 10 years learn to extend life 10 more years, and so on. We could be

I've wondered if in the next 20 years they will learn to extend life 10 years, and in those 10 years learn to extend life 10 more years, and so on. We could be on the brink of human immortality and not even know it. It probably has to happen that way, some sort of exponential function pushes us into a singularity for life expectancy

johnchristopher 3y ago
https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/ https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/ Futurist Ray Kurzweil Pulls Out All the Stops (and Pills) to Live to Witness the Singularity Maybe we are in early or alpha pre-jackpot (one free upvote to people who got the ref).
- jb1991 3y ago
  I got it! thanks in advance for the upvote!
rqtwteye 3y ago
Before we extend life span much, we first need to work on dementia. It won’t be pretty to have a lot of very people with dementia.
- khaki54 3y ago
  Agree. Does no good to have 200 year old people with osteoporosis, extreme cancer, and dementia.
  - literalAardvark 3y ago
    Aside from a handful of rare genetic issues and unlucky coin tosses, none of those are likely with a healthy lifestyle. We do have a frailty problem in old people, but pushing that back is more or less what "longevity" research is trying to do.
    - JPLeRouzic 3y ago
      > "Aside from a handful of rare genetic issues and unlucky coin tosses, none of those are likely with a healthy lifestyle." I guess you are a young person!
      - literalAardvark 3y ago
        That would depend on one's definition of young. I'm not young enough to get hired in faang.
- istjohn 3y ago
  And the process of scientific advancement. If science advances one funeral at a time, as the quote goes, the end of funerals is perilous for human advancement. Also, wealth redistribution will need to be addressed if Rockefellers, Musks, and Bezos's are going to live in perpetuity. I suppose we should add politics to the list. We're already plagued by political dynasties, e.g. the Clintons, the Bush's, the Kennedies. And it's common for senators and congresspeople to have de-facto lifetime tenure. Can you imagine still having Confederate veterans in the Senate today?
inglor_cz 3y ago
That is called longevity escape velocity and often discussed in r/Longevity subreddit etc.
csomar 3y ago
Extending life beyond 70-80s is not going to do anybody any favor unless you figure out something for aging. Old people are a liability and they serve no purpose other than emotional for your kids maybe. But someone barely living into his 90s with frequent visits to the clinic and on multiple supports (ie: need assistance for urinating) is not something enjoyable. At least from my point of view.

johnchristopher 3y ago

https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/ https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/ Futurist Ray Kurzweil Pulls Out All the Stops (and Pills) to Live to Witness the Singularity Maybe we are in early or alpha pre-jackpot (one free upvote to people who got the ref).

jb1991 3y ago
I got it! thanks in advance for the upvote!

rqtwteye 3y ago

Before we extend life span much, we first need to work on dementia. It won’t be pretty to have a lot of very people with dementia.

khaki54 3y ago
Agree. Does no good to have 200 year old people with osteoporosis, extreme cancer, and dementia.
- literalAardvark 3y ago
  Aside from a handful of rare genetic issues and unlucky coin tosses, none of those are likely with a healthy lifestyle. We do have a frailty problem in old people, but pushing that back is more or less what "longevity" research is trying to do.
  - JPLeRouzic 3y ago
    > "Aside from a handful of rare genetic issues and unlucky coin tosses, none of those are likely with a healthy lifestyle." I guess you are a young person!
    - literalAardvark 3y ago
      That would depend on one's definition of young. I'm not young enough to get hired in faang.
istjohn 3y ago
And the process of scientific advancement. If science advances one funeral at a time, as the quote goes, the end of funerals is perilous for human advancement. Also, wealth redistribution will need to be addressed if Rockefellers, Musks, and Bezos's are going to live in perpetuity. I suppose we should add politics to the list. We're already plagued by political dynasties, e.g. the Clintons, the Bush's, the Kennedies. And it's common for senators and congresspeople to have de-facto lifetime tenure. Can you imagine still having Confederate veterans in the Senate today?

inglor_cz 3y ago

That is called longevity escape velocity and often discussed in r/Longevity subreddit etc.

csomar 3y ago

Extending life beyond 70-80s is not going to do anybody any favor unless you figure out something for aging. Old people are a liability and they serve no purpose other than emotional for your kids maybe. But someone barely living into his 90s with frequent visits to the clinic and on multiple supports (ie: need assistance for urinating) is not something enjoyable. At least from my point of view.