Weak weak shit
No, you are literally the only person on here that keeps banging on about pedophilia, you seem to love talking about it, poor you. |
|
|
|
what in the ever living fuck did i miss in this thread? why are you guys talking about eternal life and such? did we forget about bitcoin?
I refer you to Tarmi's last post. |
|
|
|
0 volume.   |
|
|
|
...  You are the Dancing Queen, young and sweet, only seventeen Dancing Queen, feel the beat from the tambourine oh yeah You can dance, you can jive, having the time of your life See that girl, watch that scene, diggin' the Dancing Queen Mr. empowering, you're trying to seduce me. Aren't you? you got it sweet cheeks Must admit, a step up from your usual pickup ploy.  Hate to disappoint you, but:  *Is BTC most boring coin ever? You are OBSESSED with children. It is unnerving tbh. |
|
|
|
i'd be willing to concede that printed / grown organs will be available to you and me , as well as some advances in artificial organs to replace failing ones ... so i might expect to hit 100 instead of 80 ... genetic modification of grown humans , my bet is no ... and legally speaking , my bet is against genetic modification of embryos happening either , whether or not we're scientifically able to do it , so long as 95% of the planet still qualifies as religious ... nano-tech capable of extending life , also doubt it being invented / widely available / cost not 10 billion dollars at $1 per nanobot , at least in time for me or you ... certainly no extreme life extending cybernetics internal or external before the 22nd century , just better pacemakers , artificial joints , maybe we get a "kidney pacemaker" or a "liver pacemaker" by then , but probably the preference will be for grown replacements anyway , somewhat negating the need for these ... we aren't even close to being able to accurately map the electrical movement in a tomato in real time , nevermind a human brain , so i'd definitely put the idea of consciousness transfer at the end of the list , in any case ... we still don't have flying cars and we thought we'd have those 15 years ago ...  Another Aubrey De Grey talk. https://youtu.be/Ed4akYSJH_s (^^ is more about the philosophy, these have more about the science > + https://youtu.be/8iYpxRXlboQ + https://youtu.be/T0lvxTm2iLg) (he has visibly aged in the past few years, ironic) (ps Progress is not linear, the singularity is closer than you think) |
|
|
|
... You are the Dancing Queen, young and sweet, only seventeen Dancing Queen, feel the beat from the tambourine oh yeah You can dance, you can jive, having the time of your life See that girl, watch that scene, diggin' the Dancing Queen Mr. empowering, you're trying to seduce me. Aren't you? you got it sweet cheeks |
|
|
|
Natural evolution does not "want" eternal organisms, not even eternal species; it "wants" life to constantly evolve.
Death is a feature, not a bug. It evolved in the last billion years together with sex and reproduction, as a way to clear up space for new individuals.
You provide no arguments that eternal youthfulness is not feasible, you only state that it is indesirable for a species. I would not say "undesirable". I put "want" in quotes because species and natural evolution have no desires (thanks Lamb for seeing that  ) It is just that being mortal is part of being what we are. Yes, and 'being unable to fly' is part of what we are, ... until it isn't. You seem very keen on keeping things like they are, even if they are undesirable. Personally, I think it is very desirable for an individual, and probably for society as well.
It may be hard to believe, but, after a certain point in life, that desire usually goes away. Perhaps if your body was youthful and energetic, you would reconsider that point. Also, if people really didn't want to be alive, it's easy enough to blow your brains out. I can't help but notice that most people don't do this, which seems to suggest they value being alive. But yes, we generally hate succumbing to old age and death, just like we hate getting sick and weak. That wish must be a naturally evolved trait too, like "you must leave soon, but, as long as you are here, you must try to be as useful as you can" --- and that includes remaining as fit and healthy as you can.
It is not different from how companies treat their older employees. Indeed, retirement is the corporate version of natural death. It was invented not for the good of the individual, but for the good of the company: a barely delicate way to remove the old guys whom no one dares to fire, and open space for new blood.
There is that " Everything is as it should be" thinking again. Like we are now evolved into a perfect end state, I don't buy it. If people didn't get old, they would be able to keep functioning in their company, and there would be no need to fire them. A finite lifetime is nature's solution to make space for new individuals. Aging is a consequence of that.
I think you have things backwards. There is no planned design to remove old individuals. Your reasonings sound like rationalisations to calm the mind to me ("I shouldn't worry, everything is as it should be, everything has a reason")
Not at all. I am as unhappy at getting old as anyone else. I am just pointing out that eternal youth (which implies eternal life) is a rather complicated concept, perhaps a meaningless one. Does it make sense to wish for a car that will last forever? Does it make sense to wish for your dear Volkswagen Beetle to last forever? My Volkswagen Beetle has no consciousness. Replace Volkswagen with a pet dog, and then yes, I would want it to live forever. You also seem to be under the impression that biological change is no longer possible if we would acquire eternal youth. I would say that current and future biotech advances will allow us to adapt much more quickly to our environment than was previously possible (although it might be harder to adapt an existing organism than to engineer a new one from scratch). I can only repeat that you don't give any arguments that eternal youth is infeasible, you just argue that it is better for the species if individuals die off. I would argue that people make decisions as individuals, so your musings are irrelevant.  |
|
|
|
|
"Waste and stupidity get you the worst, that’s what he said. Use this time and it’ll temper you. Now’s the hardest test—not letting rage and frustration keep you from thinking. It’s the core of whether you can command or not.”
|
|
|
|
I would not be surprised at all in the slightest, if the first human that will live to be 500 plus years old, is already alive today.
... lambystuff fascinating.... |
|
|
|
Ive battled with the concept of eternal life since i was 8 and had a bad dream... I think it will be possible thru evolution wither technological or biological
Biological and technological evolution are going to become one in the same thing (or you could say they always were the same thing) |
|
|
|
|
I would not be surprised at all in the slightest, if the first human that will live to be 500 plus years old, is already alive today.
All that needs to happen is medical technology keeps them alive for the next 50 years, then in 50 years time the tech is around to keep them alive for another 50 years, at that point the technology should be around to keep the person alive another 50 years, at this point the person (assuming they are 30 now, will be 180 , in 150 years time I imagine we will have the tech to keep a 180 year old alive for another 100 years, and then another.
As for it not being desirable, or human, I believe it to be both.
Sure it will mean all sorts of changes for society and the way we live, no doubt, some positive and some negative, and society will no doubt struggle to keep up, but that will not stop it from happening.
We have already done life extension, as a race, and we will of course without any doubt, continue to do so, and we will get better at it, and it is feasible it will happen in many of our lifetimes.
What happens when we can be loaded into virtual space, or loaded into an avatar?
If we can escape the effects of physical aging, or extend our healthy lifespan, or all together bypass death, then yes I can see the argument that we would become depressed, bored etc but I think this is akin to going back to pre neanderthal man, basically monkeys, and asking them what being a human would be like in the future, the monkey would have no clue, and if you tried to explain french or art or physics etc to the monkey, the monkey would not have a clue what you are on about, literally the concepts would not fit.
Basically we would adapt, and evolve, as life does, we would create new education, new mechanisms, new understandings, new philosophy, new stages to life, it would change everything, but that has never ever stopped humans from doing anything, and that is not going to change now.
Life extension, to an extreme level, is pretty much inevitable, it is just a case of when, not if. I think it is all together a very common human desire to be alive and healthy, I think it is going to be possible to extend lifespan from a technological point of view. So when you couple those two facts together, you are just left with the WHEN we will get there, and not IF. So really as a society we need to start working on ways to deal with this technology, and its implications for society/humanity.
I wonder how many young parents are aware that their child may live to be 100s of years old...
We may even, extend our own lives, to extreme levels, if we can stay alive another 35- 50 years or so.
Personally I am totally up for it.
|
|
|
|
7 billion mofos on the planet and "eternal life desirable for society?". U w0t m8? I think it might even be possible eventually, but definitely not desirable IMHO. Fuck no. By the way, some species ARE immortal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMOkXkw5TKcFact is, there is probably no stopping it. Besides, having driven across several continents, I can confirm there is more than enough room and empty space. We just need to be more civilised and become better at using resources. |
|
|
|
I am very curious as to your objections why eternal youthfulness would not one day (probably far into the future) be feasible.
Natural evolution does not "want" eternal organisms, not even eternal species; it "wants" life to constantly evolve. Death is a feature, not a bug. It evolved in the last billion years together with sex and reproduction, as a way to clear up space for new individuals. Maybe one day that "solution" will no longer be necessary, because we will have infinitely expandable space and resources for everyone to live forever. But the fact is that humans inherited death from their ancestors, and have evolved their body and society around it. Everything in our body and mind was designed and adapted by evolution assuming a finite life of ~80 years plus or minus 20 (rough guesses). Total planned obsolescence. Human lifespan has evolved to be among the longest among mammals, actually, because that was needed by our nature and life cycle: a bigger brain takes much longer to program, so we need 14-20 years of learning before we are ready to leave our family and start a new one. And we live for many years after we are no longer needed as parents, because we still have some use as teachers, babysitters, sentinels, etc.. Aging is the decomissioning of body and mind parts that are not intended to be used beyond a certain stage in life. Our very desires and values change, because we are meant to have different roles in society at each stage in life. If we were to live forever, we could not be the same humans as we are today, we would have to change our body and mind and become something quite different. If a dinosaur could wish for eternal life, would it want to evolve to a monkey, or to be an eternal dinosaur? Does a child of five really wish to become an adult? Or just do the things that only adults can do, while remaining a child? Life "extension" is coming, and not too far away. Aubrey de Grey: A roadmap to end aging: https://youtu.be/8iYpxRXlboQ |
|
|
|
|
Wide area persistent stare.
Engaged.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoiners are happy to pay x2 - x10 more for drugs, as long as they can do it without leaving their basement. Repeatedly losing *all* their coin is just an added bonus.
Dealers, OTOH, learn from their mistakes.
Its not that much more expensive it depends where you live. A gram of coke in Australia is north of $400/g so... Plus its tested, reviewed and most things are much higher quality than the shit you have to go meet dodgy Phil down the back of an alley way for. Not talking about AU, US<->US. What's wrong with you Aussies tho? LE can't be *that* great down your way, why can't you get normal prices?  Their customs do not take kindly to you bringing fruit into the country, the gangs on the other hand can manufacture meth with relative ease with locally available ingredients. And also have a mighty large area to grow all the grass they could smoke, so therefore the gangs push meth and smoke... the pills and coke and the like are there but mighty costly. The cost of importing is high, in part also due to isolation. |
|
|
|
What about North Korea? Will they be dumping too?
Do you know what you can say to North Koreans on the internet? Anything you fucking want. Seriously though, they do Bitcoin mining via the washing line abacus method. |
|
|
|
Meanwhile in CHina>  That guy ^^ does not look well.... in fact he looks really quite ....... |
|
|
|
Bitcoiners are happy to pay x2 - x10 more for drugs, as long as they can do it without leaving their basement. Repeatedly losing *all* their coin is just an added bonus.
Dealers, OTOH, learn from their mistakes.
Its not that much more expensive it depends where you live. A gram of coke in Australia is north of $400/g so... Plus its tested, reviewed and most things are much higher quality than the shit you have to go meet dodgy Phil down the back of an alley way for. that dodgy Phil is a right c*nt |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
