Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sheerun t1_j3ph60p wrote

Death in nature originally served as a way to remove individuals from a population who are not able to successfully reproduce or contribute to the survival of their species. It would be nice if humans jumped over this evolutionary legacy, and offloaded evolution to organization level, instead of human level. Some would say it would be a way to accumulate wealth for these who use such therapies, buy we have the same issue with people inheriting and multiplying wealth of their parents. No death would change a little in the matter of wealth accumulation: no death = no inheritance. Overpopulation at worst can be controlled by law, but honestly when time comes we figure out how to not die, we'll hopefully also be in need of populating other planets. e.g. we could incentivize inter-planetary migrations to colonies on Europa (Moon of Jupiter) or Mars. Actually Earth-bored 200-old hyper-rich will be probably willing to go just for fun, while young low class will go for money, adventure, quick colonization. With possibility to go back of course ;) Also from what I know prolonging life is the best we can count on, as death is due to accumulation of "mistakes" our bodies make, so fixing them all will take like 1000 years even for AI. In conclusion I would not count on living forever, but I can easily imagine currently living humans to live extremely long, like 300 years.

1

Desperate_Food7354 OP t1_j3po4tx wrote

“1000 years for even an ai” little peeve there but that is a completely random number, for all you know it could take 1 week after reaching human level intellect as 6 days after it could be super intelligence and could solve problems in seconds, but even that is a theory, i’m just saying a 1000 years seems extremely doable without even using agi.

1

sheerun t1_j3pqtqz wrote

Most likely research pace will be limited by rather long human lifespan and number of "test subjects". Also ethical issues and law will stand in way

1