forums.rs

Forums

Living Forever

Quick find code: 261-262-42-65793699

of 6
Baknoob

Baknoob

Posts: 4,680 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
A lot of 19th century thinkers aptly think death is essentially a nihilation of our possibilities. I like to think I approach life with a broadly Heideggerian view, that in each moment and each decision in my life I'm in a constant state of being-towards-death, i.e., I make decisions based on, and in the full knowledge, that death is the single possibility of my impossibility of possibilities, and my actions I commit now are only possible because of this impossibility, and I make decisions broadly based on what I want to do in light of this.

Needlessly confusing, I know. (Please, if you get the chance, and are remotely interested in anything philosophical, especially about death, read some Heidegger, it's fucking mind-blowingly dense stuff).

In terms of simply immortal in regards to the ageing process alone, that's not so bad. I don't fully understand how it would work, though as I'm not a scientist I guess I can be excused on that one. Like, is it just constant cell regeneration at a certain age that keeps us at that level of health/age? Can we alter when we want this process to start, or is it set? But the idea in general, I don't mind.

Such a phenomenon as the inability to age would raise other difficult questions, too. Would we legalise euthanasia, suicide, and so forth?

Another difficult point would be overpopulation . If we never aged (25 forever for the sake of this example), this is probably the prime mating age for our species, and if the next generation were under the same age constraint too, the problem would multiply very quickly. Also, imagine growing up to be the same age as your dad lol, like both 25 years old.

The population would also stagnate. Idk about you, personally I work in a bar, and I think it's nice seeing people of all ages come in and talk to you, see different people with various attitudes towards life, and so forth. I don't think I'd want to just serve thousands of 25 year olds every day. It'd get boring.
José Mourinho's Red Army.

20-May-2016 21:19:38

Singularity
Aug Member 2023

Singularity

Posts: 97,457 Emerald Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
We'd likely become something that isn't human (I'm thinking along the lines of part-robot part-human). Maybe that's how we become immortal? We love to get all the latest updates and be with technology, would that transfer over to our own bodies? Something to think about. I mean, it's going to get to a point where nanobots (or any form of robotics) allow us to enhance our abilities and essentially make us a "better race" in terms of survivability. Obviously to start with, enhancing yourself via technology will most likely cost loads of money and be unaffordable to the majority of the population. Over time, however, it may become cheaper and cheaper, and that's when the majority will jump on the bandwagon, and too, enhance themselves.

We depend on technology for everything, even today. I think it'll transfer to our own bodies next. That's the next phase. We're always looking to make our lives easier.

Overpopulation is something to worry about. Then again, with the introduction of eliminating "death by old age". Perhaps, we'll have super-viruses wandering around killing off the population in order to keep the death rates high enough to not cause a big problem. These super-viruses would encourage the future scientists to introduce something that will completely protect us from being killed off by viruses (the next stage of Immortality). By the time we get immortal to the point where nothing can kill us, maybe we'll be a type 2/3 civilisation. At that point, overpopulation wouldn't matter because we wouldn't be bound to one specific planet. Once we learn how to travel through space properly and are able to colonise planets, overpopulation would be a thing of the past.

As for not wanting to serve 1000s of 25-years olds, maybe the "world of working" will be totally different to what we have now. Maybe you wouldn't need to work in a bar because it'd be pointless. Who knows. :P - life will definitely be different, and that includes what it means "to work". .

20-May-2016 22:15:51

Baknoob

Baknoob

Posts: 4,680 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
The precedent is already there, people are fitted with robotic hands, and other parts of their bodies that they can either control with their brain or by the smallest movement of the limbs they have remaining. Technology is staggering.

On the topic of genetic/robotic enhancements, there's already stuff like that going on, too. There's the whole thing of 'designer babies', and whether it's right to abort babies that carry genetic defects, and I'm almost certain there's some early development of enhancing an embryo's genetics and such to make it smarter, stronger, perhaps better looking (not so sure about that last one, lol).

At what point do we stop being human entirely? Is a robot-human, let alone a robot, a homo sapien? I'd argue not. That's slightly off the immortality thing, but perhaps it isn't. Perhaps finitehood is part of what makes humans human. That we may develop relations, act as moral agents, feel emotions, and all within a limited time on earth, is that not what it is to be human?

Is immortality a step away from personhood and humankind towards a new mode of being?

Maybe.
José Mourinho's Red Army.

20-May-2016 22:38:09

Weyburns
Nov Member 2021

Weyburns

Posts: 4,823 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I project that in 30 years i'll figure out transportation and teleport all of human race across the universe. Of course I cannot do it right now, and it's all just a theory, and I need to spend the next 30 years figuring it out, but I believe in 30 years I'll be able to do it.

Projecting shit like that doesn't mean anything until you actually do it, they're just tying to hype up shit they can't back up otherwise they'd be able to do it now and have the answers now. Saying in 30 years we'll figure something out is as logical as saying we'll figure things out tomorrow. Sure they might have good theories, but 30 years is a long time.
..
Hardcore Ironman
|
Ironman Discussion

@WeyburnRS
|
Draconic Fury

20-May-2016 23:18:06

Baknoob

Baknoob

Posts: 4,680 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Weyburns said :
Projecting shit like that doesn't mean anything until you actually do it, they're just tying to hype up shit they can't back up otherwise they'd be able to do it now and have the answers now.

?????

Some things are reliant on prior pieces of technology in order to be realised.

The first rocket that went into space wasn't simply assembled on the spot. It was conceived of as an idea, but technologies to not only assemble it, but to acquire the parts and ensure that it was able to actually go into space were needed beforehand. Is this not an example of projecting things that are technically possible, but need time in order to make them happen?
José Mourinho's Red Army.

20-May-2016 23:31:23

Baknoob

Baknoob

Posts: 4,680 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
The onus of the thread was geared more towards the concept of immortality, rather than how it would be practically realised, I believe.

Maybe that's just what I wanted to believe, because I find it more interesting.
José Mourinho's Red Army.

20-May-2016 23:33:26

Weyburns
Nov Member 2021

Weyburns

Posts: 4,823 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Baknoob said :
Weyburns said :
Projecting shit like that doesn't mean anything until you actually do it, they're just tying to hype up shit they can't back up otherwise they'd be able to do it now and have the answers now.

?????

Some things are reliant on prior pieces of technology in order to be realised.

The first rocket that went into space wasn't simply assembled on the spot. It was conceived of as an idea, but technologies to not only assemble it, but to acquire the parts and ensure that it was able to actually go into space were needed beforehand. Is this not an example of projecting things that are technically possible, but need time in order to make them happen?

yea, you literally didn't add anything that would reject my claims lol. Yes we need to wait, but you can feasibly state that in 30 years we'll have that technology. Like it's such a claim that can't be backed up at all and only hype is meant to be created.

Even with your arguement, you're only taking something that succeeded, idk the situation with rockets or if they were even projected to do w/e, but even if it fits in this situation it doesn't mean it's a realistic interpretation of what you can expect out of the said prediction.

Look at this:
http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/

sure they're all negative, but they can easily be flopped the other way around, cbf finding something that's more relevant in the wording.

Do you know how many new technologies flop cuz they don't workout as planned? More than likely the same will happen here. We can't even get people to accept global warming, and you want people to believe there will be nanites in our brain? (didn't fully read the article if that isn't what they said then my bad).

Plus take a look at moores law and come back to me, that is starting to fail slowly.
..
Hardcore Ironman
|
Ironman Discussion

@WeyburnRS
|
Draconic Fury

20-May-2016 23:39:19

Baknoob

Baknoob

Posts: 4,680 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I don't understand what you're saying.

It's pointless saying it might happen (immortality breakthrough), as it might not, but it might? So we'll just wait and find out? Ok?

Sure, a lot of technological prophecies don't come true, but what if this is the exception that proves the rule?

Even if (tragedy!) it doesn't happen, is it not interesting to entertain the idea that it might ?

It's like pondering about what you'd do if you won the lottery. Sure, it's not likely to happen, but it might - which makes it more exciting to think about. Thus, what's wrong with hype?

If you're just a little upset he's put a time stamp on when it might be possible, I don't think that really matters, it could be in a hundred years. So, yes, I concede, its factual content isn't very forceful, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still interesting to think about.
José Mourinho's Red Army.

20-May-2016 23:55:07 - Last edited on 21-May-2016 00:00:24 by Baknoob

Quick find code: 261-262-42-65793699 Back to Top