Can Nanotech Cure Death?

[Maq47]

Eventually someone will come along and wipe out the universe's population with the snap of the fingers.

I see what you did there... Thanos

 

[tinysolderingguy]

>freak accidents and murder
id rather die normally than live wayy longer and die from either

 

[Vieela]

It's really weird seeing people wanting not to die. Not being sarcastical at all, it's kind of just natural and programmed to be like this ever since the start. I think living on the same life for way too long might get boring. Maybe stopping aging or at least making it slower would be interesting, as it would allow us to live better lifestyles at older ages, but having eternal life really sounds boring round' here.

 

[FAST6191]

It's really weird seeing people wanting not to die
it's kind of just natural and programmed to be like this ever since the start

That does not make for a good argument. We have twisted and changed the world beyond anything that likely would have happened by chance, or indeed any one thing would have happened by chance, which is to say nothing we have now is natural, not even close.

If living the same life would get boring then change -- if you have effectively infinite time then you can happily afford to do that.

 

[Darth Meteos]

100 years isn't immortal

Functional immortality like it probably would happen is that we'd extend our lives by a certain amount, and during that time, we'd refine the technology again and again, and essentially never reach the death point. Say we extend our lives by a century. In that century, more effective anti-aging would be invented to make you even more resilent to time, and more, and more, essentially making you immortal.

 

[CallmeBerto]

I'd want to live forever. I would like to see what the future has in store for us. If anything I would end up becoming some kind of historian as a result.

 

[Darth Meteos]

That does not make for a good argument. We have twisted and changed the world beyond anything that likely would have happened by chance, or indeed any one thing would have happened by chance, which is to say nothing we have now is natural, not even close.

If living the same life would get boring then change -- if you have effectively infinite time then you can happily afford to do that.

The concept I was offered was: imagine deciding to change careers without the weight on time on your shoulders, being able to study for a decade and get really good at another field and reach a high level in it.

 

[SG854]

Functional immortality like it probably would happen is that we'd extend our lives by a certain amount, and during that time, we'd refine the technology again and again, and essentially never reach the death point. Say we extend our lives by a century. In that century, more effective anti-aging would be invented to make you even more resilent to time, and more, and more, essentially making you immortal.

And since people are extending their lives there will be veterans in the field using that experience to create even more advance technology than a human with a 76 average life span can. Think of what 300 yrs of expertise can do.

Combine this with the Intelligence Race we are in right now pretty soon the average person will have IQ's greater than Einstein. Think of how fast technology will progress when everyone has Einsteins intelligence and even more people will be smart enough to work in the Scientific Field.

 

[Darth Meteos]

Think of how fast technology will progress when everyone has Einsteins intelligence and even more people will be smart enough to work in the Scientific Field.

Might need to give it a century for the "don't want no govvermat in mah head" types to die off.

 

[SG854]

Might need to give it a century for the "don't want no govvermat in mah head" types to die off.

Embryo selecting for high IQ's will soon to be a thing. People will have ethical issues with it. But countries that don't do this will be left behind in the technological race, when other countries are making more progress and are becoming more prosperous. That will force countries to give up their beliefs and join in the IQ selecting to be able to have a chance to compete economically.

 

[Ericthegreat]

Functional immortality like it probably would happen is that we'd extend our lives by a certain amount, and during that time, we'd refine the technology again and again, and essentially never reach the death point. Say we extend our lives by a century. In that century, more effective anti-aging would be invented to make you even more resilent to time, and more, and more, essentially making you immortal.

So your saying everyone will live in constant fear of death, instead of accepting it?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Embryo selecting for high IQ's will soon to be a thing. People will have ethical issues with it. But countries that don't do this will be left behind in the technological race, when other countries are making more progress and are becoming more prosperous. That will force countries to give up their beliefs and join in the IQ selecting to be able to have a chance to compete economically.

I think we will find that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

 

[Darth Meteos]

So your saying everyone will live in constant fear of death, instead of accepting it?

Preferable to actual oblivion. I am all that is in my universe, everything comes through these eyeballs. If I die and am destroyed, it defeats the purpose of learning and living. Limited or not, immortality should be the primary goal of the 21st century, since we finally are reaching the technological state where it's feasible.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Average life span of humans use to be in the 20’s. So our bodies never evolved to cope with aging past our late 20’s. That fact that we used science and tech to live up to our 70’s we are already extending human life.

Ok, there's a misconception here you need to understand; that average doesn't exist because people only lived into their 20s and then keeled over, it's because a comparatively small percentage lived into their 70s and 80s while many didn't even survive infancy. It's not lifespan necessarily that's improved over the years, it's instead reduced mortality rates reducing the lower "outlier" in the average

 

[KingVamp]

Some of the same technology that's going to be use to extend lives, are also going make existing humans smarter and stronger.

If it gets to the point where everyone is learning things quickly through technology, a 300 years old wouldn't necessarily be anymore skilled or smarter than someone younger than that.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

a 300 years old wouldn't necessarily be anymore skilled or smarter than someone younger than that.

I don't necessarily see how a person's worth should be tied to their intelligence or skill level, though

 

[FAST6191]

[IQ races]
I think we will find that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

Because computers will take over?
Most fields of human endeavour these days seem to be if not intelligence driven then massively aided by it and I see no great reason, other than some kind of computer driven utopia, for that to stop.

 

[KingVamp]

I don't necessarily see how a person's worth should be tied to their intelligence or skill level, though

That's not what I meant by that. Wasn't saying anything about worth.

Just going against the idea that someone who lives longer doing and learning something, would necessarily be more smarter or more skill than the ones around them.

 

[FAST6191]

If we have the kind of tech that makes people "live forever", especially if it is the nanotech type stuff rather than something like "protein which disables ageing mechanisms", then we surely have the ability to... I guess it would be uplift the legacy humans if they fall behind in the tech curve. Substantial changes in living organisms has traditionally been hard but it is less of an issue today (CRISPR being a nice jumping off point) and will presumably be less of one still in a world where becoming outdated is a real concern.

 

[deinonychus71]

Shouldn't we worry about the survivability of our planet BEFORE our own?

 

[TotalInsanity4]

That's not what I meant by that. Wasn't saying anything about worth.

Just going against the idea that someone who lives longer doing and learning something, would necessarily be more smarter or more skill than the ones around them.

Oh, I see. So like in terms of societal advancement there's no point in living past a certain point?