4 ms·

If we can expand life expectancy by 30 years, we would effective double if not exponentially increase the rate of progress. This is because it takes scientists

If we can expand life expectancy by 30 years, we would effective double if not exponentially increase the rate of progress. This is because it takes scientists and engineers about 30 years to mature into their field and find their niche, counting from childbirth. Another 30 years before their are close to retirement age. If people were healthy into their 90's, you'd have unbelievable masters of their craft working at high levels for an additional 30 years.

mcguire 13y ago
I'm not sure I buy that. There seems to be a half-life effect for people working in one field; after some period of time, call it 20 years, a significant proportion of them have either changed fields dramatically, or have become stagnant. On the other hand, the possibilities of cross-pollination....
VLM 13y ago
On the other hand look at fields like programming, where due to ageism and such, you've got a shorter career than a pro football quarterback before you get replaced by a cheap new grad. So you'd have genius grade programmers working at walmart as people greeters from age 30 to age 90, contributing to open source and stuff. This has both good points and bad points. Another interesting one to think about on the other side, is its not entirely unusual for academics to spend a large fraction of their working years as minions before getting a professorship and tenure and a serious paycheck... imagine having to do grunt work twice as long as now.
- hyperpape 13y ago
  Shorter than a pro football quarterback? Let's compare Rob Pike and Brett Favre. Ageism in CS seems to be real and a huge issue, but let's try to be accurate about the extent of it.
- gaius 13y ago
  I don't think this would be an issue, since to have a world where people live longer, you also need to have fewer kids. You can only practice ageism if you have a surplus at the young end.
  - VLM 13y ago
    That is an excellent point, although lets say an average grad is remains employable for the same 1/4 of his working years, thats still in absolute terms more years for the unemployable 3/4 of his working life. Assuming we'd continue working the same fraction of our lives, and not continue to retire at 60-something and then remain retired for the next 440 years.

mcguire 13y ago

I'm not sure I buy that. There seems to be a half-life effect for people working in one field; after some period of time, call it 20 years, a significant proportion of them have either changed fields dramatically, or have become stagnant. On the other hand, the possibilities of cross-pollination....

VLM 13y ago

On the other hand look at fields like programming, where due to ageism and such, you've got a shorter career than a pro football quarterback before you get replaced by a cheap new grad. So you'd have genius grade programmers working at walmart as people greeters from age 30 to age 90, contributing to open source and stuff. This has both good points and bad points. Another interesting one to think about on the other side, is its not entirely unusual for academics to spend a large fraction of their working years as minions before getting a professorship and tenure and a serious paycheck... imagine having to do grunt work twice as long as now.

hyperpape 13y ago
Shorter than a pro football quarterback? Let's compare Rob Pike and Brett Favre. Ageism in CS seems to be real and a huge issue, but let's try to be accurate about the extent of it.
gaius 13y ago
I don't think this would be an issue, since to have a world where people live longer, you also need to have fewer kids. You can only practice ageism if you have a surplus at the young end.
- VLM 13y ago
  That is an excellent point, although lets say an average grad is remains employable for the same 1/4 of his working years, thats still in absolute terms more years for the unemployable 3/4 of his working life. Assuming we'd continue working the same fraction of our lives, and not continue to retire at 60-something and then remain retired for the next 440 years.