8 ms·

Woz is one of the most selfless people I've ever met. At a conference he keynoted for (SynBioBeta), he said that even if immortality were available to him, he

Woz is one of the most selfless people I've ever met. At a conference he keynoted for (SynBioBeta), he said that even if immortality were available to him, he wouldn't want to live forever, because he'd be taking up a spot in the Earth's population carrying capacity, and even if that's just one spot of many billions, he wouldn't feel right taking up that spot, when he's already lived his life and now it's time for someone new to get the chance to enjoy the adventure that is living.

kome 3y ago
It's surprising to me that such an obviously common-sense viewpoint is being treated as if it's extraordinary. Nonetheless, it's commendable that he hasn't succumbed to the delusions of grandeur and immortality.
- tourist2d 3y ago
  If you asked the population if they would want immortality, the common answer wouldn't be "no".
  - fomine3 3y ago
    Is it? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-live-forever-immortality-study-b1862042.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-... https://www.newscientist.com/article/2179928-only-one-in-five-uk-adults-would-choose-to-live-forever-if-they-could/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2179928-only-one-in-fiv...
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      You beat me because I was selecting quotes.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    According to surveys your intuition is wrong. USA: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-live-forever-immortality-study-b1862042.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-... > Researchers from the university separated respondents into three groups, based on age. One group was younger people, between the ages of 18 and 29, another group of senior citizens whose average age was 72, and a third group made up of individuals whose average age was 88. 18 - 29: 34% Yes, 40% No, 26% unsure Average age 72: 32% Yes, 43% No, 25% unsure Average age 88: 24% Yes, 59% No, 17% unsure > Differences in responses emerged along gender lines as well, with more men saying they would take the pill than women. And ironically: > "If a life extension treatment were to become available that effectively stopped ageing, young adults may be likely to use such a treatment to avoid reaching the ages at which older cohorts say they would prefer to live forever," the study determined.
    - jodrellblank 3y ago
      I wonder how many of those people who want immortality currently avoid smoking, drinking, drugs, air pollution, junk food, get long sleep every night and regular exercise - all those things that are much easier than immortality and can meaningfully increase the chances of adding one, two, three decades of quality life. And then avoid social media, clickbait, ragebait, idling, gossipping, and live in a deliberate and conscious way to make the best use of their time (best according to their own metrics). (Given that 66% of people are overweight, seeing 59% say they would like immortality suggests there's overlap. Not that I'm preaching, I don't do much of that stuff, and there is argument to want immortality to fritter away on enjoyments and relaxing and that maybe people are unhealthy because they are 'driving it like they stole it' for their limited time - but it's possible to play the finite lifetime cards we're dealt a lot better than than most of us do, without even getting to extremes and maximising things).
      - epups 3y ago
        Not sure this is equivalent. Those decades of life are usually worst ones, and merely doubling your lifespan with sacrifice is not equivalent to multiplying it indefinitely.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  What's so common-sense about it? Or even commendable? Earth's carrying capacity is a problem to be solved, there are many viable solutions that can be executed in parallel, and it doesn't really sound like a big challenge relative to getting life extension working in the first place. Really, it's just bewildering to me that having a death wish is considered common-sense, normal viewpoint.
  - upwardbound 3y ago
    I think Woz's point is that no matter how much the carrying capacity of the Earth (or even the entire solar system, or galaxy) is increased, it will always be finite. It's possible that we might be lucky enough to live through a great era of spaceward expansion during which even our best efforts at population growth are slower than the than the even faster growth of population capacity, and that would be amazing. That's the type of historical era in which a slogan of "be fruitful and multiply" is really good advice. But unless the universe has infinite future potential -- specifically, a way to access a limitless source of negentropy (either through time travel or magitech or something equally reality-warping) -- then eventually the population capacity would stop growing.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      Extended to the limit, it's a fair point, but this type of thinking is arguably far from common-sense (since it's uncommon for people to engage in universe-scale hypotheticals), and arguably a problem for the future - i.e. for when we start outgrowing the galaxy or something.
      - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        It's not a problem for the future, it's where we are at now until sufficiently advanced technology (or sufficiently peaceful international relations) intervenes.
        fastball 3y ago
        Ok but if you're goal is actually some form of altruism, wouldn't keeping a clearly innovative person around forever be more useful than rolling your dice with whoever is taking his spot? Statistically, they are going to be not as useful (depending on your definition of useful of course).
- worklaptopacct 3y ago
  I don't know if it's universally a common sense standpoint with regard to everyone. Some people have a purpose to provide to their family and leave a legacy; this is a goal that can be fulfilled. But what if your life motive is to learn, create and put your skills to a common good?
- jojobas 3y ago
  >delusions of grandeur and immortality Jobs took over his share of that.
- jollofricepeas 3y ago
  Good point. We say many altruistic things when we’re happy and healthy. There’s a great opinion article from a doctor that says people faced with death that come into a hospital usually change their minds about receiving care that would prolong their lives. I have seen this many times as a caretaker for my own family members. It’s only at the doorstep of death that we know how we truly feel about death itself. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/opinion/advance-directives-death.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/opinion/advance-directive...
- renegade-otter 3y ago
  It's probably NOT that uncommon, but modern civilization allows so many creature comforts for the ultra-rich that they feel literally in heaven. They get the best of everything, almost instantly. Luxurious cars, an army of help, private planes, the latest technology, privacy and large mansions, beautiful partners, and the non-stop adulation and drooling over by the public. It's trivial to develop the god complex with that kind of life and the desire to prolong it as much as possible. They know what they have, and they want to keep it forever. Why hedge on the unproven promise of eternal life if you can live in paradise already? https://theweek.com/science/the-billionaire-led-quest-for-immortality https://theweek.com/science/the-billionaire-led-quest-for-im... Not surprisingly, it's the kind of people who, if allowed to eternally accumulate wealth and power, will eventually cause catastrophic damage to humanity if they feel not adored enough. Many don't even need multiple lifetimes do get there. Wozniak's point of view is very uncommon in the rarefied slice of the population that he inhabits.
  - upwardbound 3y ago
    > Wozniak's point of view is very uncommon in the rarefied slice of the population that he inhabits. Exactly.
cracrecry 3y ago
why do we have to limit ourselves to earth? It is like people can't look away and look at billions upon billions of galaxies clusters and could only see the limits of the Earth. The Earth is finite! we can't grow exponentially forever!
- Mo3 3y ago
  You act like we are limiting ourselves to earth on purpose. We're just not there yet.
- schiffern 3y ago
  > we can't grow exponentially forever! We can't grow exponentially forever in space either. Somehow this gets forgotten. O(N^t) > O(t^3), for all N > 1 Here t^3 is the future light-cone of Earth, ie this assumes [trans]humanity expands at the speed of light and instantly colonizes all matter. This is an optimistic upper bound IMO.
  - jojobas 3y ago
    Something something heat death of the universe.
    - upwardbound 3y ago
      I do hope that our civilization starts someday putting substantial research funding into moonshot bets to escape this limiting ending. For example, if we eventually have multiple star systems' worth of resources at our disposal, then I hope we put at least a trillion dollars per topic into long-shot research topics such as time travel, the multiverse, FTL travel, methods of creating new universes via an artificial Big Bang, applied theology (trying to find evidence of a God so that we can communicate with them), methods of achieving infinitely positive states of qualia such as something like nirvāṇa, and so on. Each bet might be 1 in a million - but I'd much rather that we try every possible chance at escaping what we currently see as the inevitable, and not go gentle into that heat death night. This goal, to break through the wall at the end of the universe, was what Asimov called for in his inspiring short story The Last Question. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html
gosub100 3y ago
contrast that to Jobs' "use my private jet to get first dibs on a healthy liver so I can try alternative medicine and die anyway"
- wholinator2 3y ago
  I don't know all the specifics of jobs journey but a terminal cancer diagnosis does things to one's mind. My mother took every medical intervention offered her and by the end she was very much wishing she hadn't. Certain techniques the medical field has developed have the effect of really only prolonging the suffering at the very end of life. The whole family including her was begging god to end our suffering, for months.
  - oblio 3y ago
    He didn't start with a terminal cancer diagnosis. He ended up with one because he didn't do what he was supposed to do, when he was supposed to do it.
  - hajile 3y ago
    He had a contained, super-slow growing pancreatic cancer with a high-90s survival rate if he got his pancreas removed. Instead, he waited years until it had metastasized everywhere and it was too late simply because he couldn't bear the though of someone cutting on him. They then did a far more massive surgery on a fool's errand trying to cut it out of all the places it had gone. Then he paid off a transplant foundation to get a liver that he definitely shouldn't have gotten meaning someone else died so he could get a transplant then die anyway. He's quite a contrast to Woz IMO.
- olifante 3y ago
  This constant vilification of one of the great figures of tech history is tiresome. Yeah, maybe Steve Jobs was not a great person, but why should constantly overshadow his tremendous successes? Steve Jobs was a forceful and perhaps disagreeable character, but he is one of the clearest examples of how having relentless drive and taste can change the world. Focus less on the feet of clay and more on the giant. And not to diminish Wozniak’s tremendous achievements, but Steve Jobs continuously innovated over the course of decades and had a much greater impact on the world.

kome 3y ago

It's surprising to me that such an obviously common-sense viewpoint is being treated as if it's extraordinary. Nonetheless, it's commendable that he hasn't succumbed to the delusions of grandeur and immortality.

tourist2d 3y ago
If you asked the population if they would want immortality, the common answer wouldn't be "no".
- fomine3 3y ago
  Is it? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-live-forever-immortality-study-b1862042.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-... https://www.newscientist.com/article/2179928-only-one-in-five-uk-adults-would-choose-to-live-forever-if-they-could/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2179928-only-one-in-fiv...
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    You beat me because I was selecting quotes.
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  According to surveys your intuition is wrong. USA: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-live-forever-immortality-study-b1862042.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-... > Researchers from the university separated respondents into three groups, based on age. One group was younger people, between the ages of 18 and 29, another group of senior citizens whose average age was 72, and a third group made up of individuals whose average age was 88. 18 - 29: 34% Yes, 40% No, 26% unsure Average age 72: 32% Yes, 43% No, 25% unsure Average age 88: 24% Yes, 59% No, 17% unsure > Differences in responses emerged along gender lines as well, with more men saying they would take the pill than women. And ironically: > "If a life extension treatment were to become available that effectively stopped ageing, young adults may be likely to use such a treatment to avoid reaching the ages at which older cohorts say they would prefer to live forever," the study determined.
  - jodrellblank 3y ago
    I wonder how many of those people who want immortality currently avoid smoking, drinking, drugs, air pollution, junk food, get long sleep every night and regular exercise - all those things that are much easier than immortality and can meaningfully increase the chances of adding one, two, three decades of quality life. And then avoid social media, clickbait, ragebait, idling, gossipping, and live in a deliberate and conscious way to make the best use of their time (best according to their own metrics). (Given that 66% of people are overweight, seeing 59% say they would like immortality suggests there's overlap. Not that I'm preaching, I don't do much of that stuff, and there is argument to want immortality to fritter away on enjoyments and relaxing and that maybe people are unhealthy because they are 'driving it like they stole it' for their limited time - but it's possible to play the finite lifetime cards we're dealt a lot better than than most of us do, without even getting to extremes and maximising things).
    - epups 3y ago
      Not sure this is equivalent. Those decades of life are usually worst ones, and merely doubling your lifespan with sacrifice is not equivalent to multiplying it indefinitely.
TeMPOraL 3y ago
What's so common-sense about it? Or even commendable? Earth's carrying capacity is a problem to be solved, there are many viable solutions that can be executed in parallel, and it doesn't really sound like a big challenge relative to getting life extension working in the first place. Really, it's just bewildering to me that having a death wish is considered common-sense, normal viewpoint.
- upwardbound 3y ago
  I think Woz's point is that no matter how much the carrying capacity of the Earth (or even the entire solar system, or galaxy) is increased, it will always be finite. It's possible that we might be lucky enough to live through a great era of spaceward expansion during which even our best efforts at population growth are slower than the than the even faster growth of population capacity, and that would be amazing. That's the type of historical era in which a slogan of "be fruitful and multiply" is really good advice. But unless the universe has infinite future potential -- specifically, a way to access a limitless source of negentropy (either through time travel or magitech or something equally reality-warping) -- then eventually the population capacity would stop growing.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    Extended to the limit, it's a fair point, but this type of thinking is arguably far from common-sense (since it's uncommon for people to engage in universe-scale hypotheticals), and arguably a problem for the future - i.e. for when we start outgrowing the galaxy or something.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      It's not a problem for the future, it's where we are at now until sufficiently advanced technology (or sufficiently peaceful international relations) intervenes.
      - fastball 3y ago
        Ok but if you're goal is actually some form of altruism, wouldn't keeping a clearly innovative person around forever be more useful than rolling your dice with whoever is taking his spot? Statistically, they are going to be not as useful (depending on your definition of useful of course).
worklaptopacct 3y ago
I don't know if it's universally a common sense standpoint with regard to everyone. Some people have a purpose to provide to their family and leave a legacy; this is a goal that can be fulfilled. But what if your life motive is to learn, create and put your skills to a common good?
jojobas 3y ago
>delusions of grandeur and immortality Jobs took over his share of that.
jollofricepeas 3y ago
Good point. We say many altruistic things when we’re happy and healthy. There’s a great opinion article from a doctor that says people faced with death that come into a hospital usually change their minds about receiving care that would prolong their lives. I have seen this many times as a caretaker for my own family members. It’s only at the doorstep of death that we know how we truly feel about death itself. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/opinion/advance-directives-death.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/opinion/advance-directive...
renegade-otter 3y ago
It's probably NOT that uncommon, but modern civilization allows so many creature comforts for the ultra-rich that they feel literally in heaven. They get the best of everything, almost instantly. Luxurious cars, an army of help, private planes, the latest technology, privacy and large mansions, beautiful partners, and the non-stop adulation and drooling over by the public. It's trivial to develop the god complex with that kind of life and the desire to prolong it as much as possible. They know what they have, and they want to keep it forever. Why hedge on the unproven promise of eternal life if you can live in paradise already? https://theweek.com/science/the-billionaire-led-quest-for-immortality https://theweek.com/science/the-billionaire-led-quest-for-im... Not surprisingly, it's the kind of people who, if allowed to eternally accumulate wealth and power, will eventually cause catastrophic damage to humanity if they feel not adored enough. Many don't even need multiple lifetimes do get there. Wozniak's point of view is very uncommon in the rarefied slice of the population that he inhabits.
- upwardbound 3y ago
  > Wozniak's point of view is very uncommon in the rarefied slice of the population that he inhabits. Exactly.

cracrecry 3y ago

why do we have to limit ourselves to earth? It is like people can't look away and look at billions upon billions of galaxies clusters and could only see the limits of the Earth. The Earth is finite! we can't grow exponentially forever!

Mo3 3y ago
You act like we are limiting ourselves to earth on purpose. We're just not there yet.
schiffern 3y ago
> we can't grow exponentially forever! We can't grow exponentially forever in space either. Somehow this gets forgotten. O(N^t) > O(t^3), for all N > 1 Here t^3 is the future light-cone of Earth, ie this assumes [trans]humanity expands at the speed of light and instantly colonizes all matter. This is an optimistic upper bound IMO.
- jojobas 3y ago
  Something something heat death of the universe.
  - upwardbound 3y ago
    I do hope that our civilization starts someday putting substantial research funding into moonshot bets to escape this limiting ending. For example, if we eventually have multiple star systems' worth of resources at our disposal, then I hope we put at least a trillion dollars per topic into long-shot research topics such as time travel, the multiverse, FTL travel, methods of creating new universes via an artificial Big Bang, applied theology (trying to find evidence of a God so that we can communicate with them), methods of achieving infinitely positive states of qualia such as something like nirvāṇa, and so on. Each bet might be 1 in a million - but I'd much rather that we try every possible chance at escaping what we currently see as the inevitable, and not go gentle into that heat death night. This goal, to break through the wall at the end of the universe, was what Asimov called for in his inspiring short story The Last Question. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html

gosub100 3y ago

contrast that to Jobs' "use my private jet to get first dibs on a healthy liver so I can try alternative medicine and die anyway"

wholinator2 3y ago
I don't know all the specifics of jobs journey but a terminal cancer diagnosis does things to one's mind. My mother took every medical intervention offered her and by the end she was very much wishing she hadn't. Certain techniques the medical field has developed have the effect of really only prolonging the suffering at the very end of life. The whole family including her was begging god to end our suffering, for months.
- oblio 3y ago
  He didn't start with a terminal cancer diagnosis. He ended up with one because he didn't do what he was supposed to do, when he was supposed to do it.
- hajile 3y ago
  He had a contained, super-slow growing pancreatic cancer with a high-90s survival rate if he got his pancreas removed. Instead, he waited years until it had metastasized everywhere and it was too late simply because he couldn't bear the though of someone cutting on him. They then did a far more massive surgery on a fool's errand trying to cut it out of all the places it had gone. Then he paid off a transplant foundation to get a liver that he definitely shouldn't have gotten meaning someone else died so he could get a transplant then die anyway. He's quite a contrast to Woz IMO.
olifante 3y ago
This constant vilification of one of the great figures of tech history is tiresome. Yeah, maybe Steve Jobs was not a great person, but why should constantly overshadow his tremendous successes? Steve Jobs was a forceful and perhaps disagreeable character, but he is one of the clearest examples of how having relentless drive and taste can change the world. Focus less on the feet of clay and more on the giant. And not to diminish Wozniak’s tremendous achievements, but Steve Jobs continuously innovated over the course of decades and had a much greater impact on the world.