31 replies to this topic

[Berserker]

Do you think you will reach longevity escape velocity and that you will get a huge lifeextension

Hello, i would like to know your opinions about it. If you can, say your age and justify your answers. In my case, I am 18 years old and i don’t think that any of my generation will be able to do it, unless cryonics works, which it’s not likely. As you can see I am very pessimistic about it. Its not just about technological and biological reason, i mean, even its is possible to stop aging in the next year, government will never allowed the use for the average people.

Sorry by my english, its not my mother language:s

Edited by Berserker, 13 October 2009 - 08:01 PM.
edited title for easier reading

[Mind]

I am 38 and I think, barring an fatal accident or total societal collapse, that I will reach longevity escape velocity. This is subjectively based on the amount of research that I see being conducted from a wide range of scientific fields - biotechnology, AI, genetics, nanotechnology etc...

Our knowledge of the human body and aging grows every year.

I have also signed up for cryonics.

[Esoparagon]

I'm 19. I'm not sure if I'll make it but there are quite a few people around 40 who seem to think they have a chance at it so I'm just going to keep myself as healthy as possible and hope for the best. I'll probably sign up for cryonics too. Depending on the state of medical anti-aging research and so on when I'm 30 or 40 I may go on CRON. I'm thinking of starting 10-20% mild CRON now at 20 or 21.

Edited by Esoparagon, 13 October 2009 - 08:39 PM.

[Berserker]

Thanks for your answer! anyone else can give his/her opinion?

[FNC]

I am currently 17 years 7 months old, there is much debate to as whether it will be reached or not. Regardless, I am positive that some powerful innovations will emerge in my lifetime, as a result we may be able to achieve the Kurzweil inspired bridge to a bridge.

[VictorBjoerk]

It all depends on many factors, but I feel optimistic that aging will be eventually cured as long as nothing unexpected happens. I'm 19. Would want to sign up for cryonics in the future as there is always the risk for getting a disease etc.

Some days I feel less optimistic, one gets frustrated by what de Grey and members here refer to as " the pro-aging trance". But eventually I think the ideas of aging as being good and natural will fade away when real treatments against age-related apthology begin to emerge.

Edited by VictorBjoerk, 22 October 2009 - 06:41 PM.

[Delorean]

I just feel that we can't know either way. It pretty safe to say that there will be game changing developments in the next 20-40 years (at the level of telephone/internet - these kinds of changes) and with that in mind i just don't see how anyone can claim to know what is going to happen, and in particular, what we CANT do. The only exception i'd give to this is Kurzweil, simply because he tries to plot it out logically using trends to project the future. Whether you want to debate his methods/conclusions or whatever, that's fine but i still think his whole thing is a worthwhile exercise.

So with the exception of what Kurzweil does, i think talking about 30-40-50 years into the future is fun but way too difficult. I have absolutely no limits on what i think is achievable (bar engineering a new universe maybe) in my lifetime. Something could come along in 25 years that increases our productivity 1000 times over; what would be the result of 10 years working at that level of productivity?

[TheFountain]

Why doesn't anyone take into account that certain branches of the government can and will try to stop the movement before it reaches EV? So what are you going to do about that is the real question?

Edited by TheFountain, 28 October 2009 - 05:16 PM.

[brokenportal]

Many of us ask ourselves this question, unsure of whos doing what and how fast they or slow they may be going. We think that maybe "they" can get it done in 25 years, maybe 45, maybe 75 or 100, we dont know.

Heres the good news though. WE ARE THEY. This happens at the same rate as the speed at which we all collectively go. Every, single, input of volunteer hours is unbeleivably priceless. Its you that makes this difference. Its your contribution that decides whether we live or die. We are like Generals woken in the middle of a battle field, with one eye, in the land of the blind. It is our duty to bring the vision that we have to the rest of the world. The rest of the world depends on us, they need us to bring this cause to them.

There is more good news to this too, bringing this cause to them is as simple as spreading the word. All we have to do is inform them, and we have many projects, big and small, short and tall, for one and all, you can get in where you fit in in projects that are under way, or in development.

It is the small things that are the big things at this stage in this movement for indefinite life extension. This really is a unique time filled with extrodinary opportunities for any body to make a big difference in a cause so pivotal and crucial. Every single action that we take now ads up like the penny doubling effect. If you double a penny once a month for 35 months you end up with over a billion dollars. So these first 35 doubles mean the most. Once this cause is world wide, then your small contributions wont mean as much. Dont wait till then to make them, make them now, when their impact and reward is the greatest. The anvil is red hot and now is the time to strike. Strike now.

I would guess that we have about a 5 year window here to get through to the world. If we all put in our 2 cents today then this can be world wide in 5 years, easy. Think about it, pepsi, bubbly pop stars hopping around squeeling gibberish and all kinds of things can influence the mentality of the world in far less than 5 years. We can definitely do this in 5 or so.

So, my recommendation to everybody, and I could be wrong, but put everything else that you can bring yourself to, aside, for the next 5 years or so, and pour all of your engergy and resources and efforts in to doing what you can in this grass roots stage of this cause now. When the cause goes mainstream world wide, then lets resume our niches in society, then lets continue with our degrees full time and really put the heat in to our businesses, and go out and build on to our houses and buy those boats and things. Now is the time to strike. We need you all now, desperately, today, this is a battle for indefinity, and we need every single recruit at the front lines asap like there is no freaking tomorrow.

[brokenportal]

Im thinking about submitting my last reply there as a possibilty for the front page. We'll see how it goes. Heres a video on LEV:

[rabagley]

Nearly certainly not and I suspect the reason will be cancer. We're well on the road to pushing other aspects of senescence out to the point where cancer will return as the #1 killer. However, progress on understanding and defeating all of the varieties of aggressive cancer has essentially stalled despite enormous amounts of funding and over 50 years of accumulated knowledge. There are too many cellular failures with apparently intractable solutions (intractable by the time the cancer is identified) that cause aggressive cancer and the tools that have been developed (chemo, radiation, excision) are too crude to offer more than a temporary respite.

I suspect that eventually we will have full genetic control and/or some other means of effective cancer prevention but that it will not happen in time for my generation or the next several generations, dooming my body to age and die, very possibly of cancer.

There is a very distinct possibility that we'll be able to build a brain simulator and download consciousnesses (ala the Heechee) before my death, an option that I will gleefully jump at if the resources are available to me.

[brokenportal]

I think one way it all boils down is that that the answer to whether or not we reach longevity escape velocity in our life times depends on how many of these notions are switched on:

Nearly certainly not and I suspect the reason will be cancer.

Vs. how many of these notions are switched on:

This happens at the same rate as the speed at which we all collectively go. Its your contribution that can decide whether we live or die.

[Cyberbrain]

With each passing decade, we're gaining more and more years to our lifespan. A person who right now is in their 60's or even 70's and take proper care of themselves could live long enough to reach the longevity escape velocity in my opinion (though they'd be better off signing up for cryonics).

We're seeing enormous medical advances every year at an exponential rate. Within 15 to 20 years aging will slow down significantly. Within 20 to 30 years we'd be able to stop the aging process and with 20 to 40 years we'd also be able to reverse the affects of aging keeping us indefinitely young and healthy.

[rabagley]

I think one way it all boils down is that that the answer to whether or not we reach longevity escape velocity in our life times depends on how many of these notions are switched on:

Nearly certainly not and I suspect the reason will be cancer.

Vs. how many of these notions are switched on:

This happens at the same rate as the speed at which we all collectively go. Its your contribution that can decide whether we live or die.

I don't mean to be snarky, but your argument sounds like, "If we all believe it really, really hard, we can make it happen!" That's great for motivating people to do well in sports, where motivation and luck are often the only differences between success and failure, but not such a great argument in a discussion about the progress of science, where motivation is not the only thing between scientists and the breakthroughs required to substantially slow or reverse aging.

Going back to my statement for a moment, I'm all for funding research that actually has a chance against cancer, but "more of the same" isn't going to cut it and I suspect that cancer as a class of problems will only fall to a significant reverse engineering of cellular metabolism (someone writing out fairly complete documentation for our genome). Maybe this will happen in time to save me (I'm 37), but I suspect not. The central issue of cancer is that it is a huge collection of gerontological problems and as Aubrey states in his Google talk, we don't really understand metabolism, so we don't get very far on gerontological problems, let alone huge collections of them.

Something that separates me from many people on this board is that I see immortality as an interesting and worthwhile goal, but not a necessary one. I will have been happy with my life if I am hit by a bus tomorrow or if I fall to cancer in 2059, or if my end is some accident in transit to my second extra-terrestrial star system in 3059 (relativistic Gregorian calendar, authoritatively tracked at earth geosynch station alpha).

[brokenportal]

Well, I know what you mean, and I agree. If thats what I was saying then I would say the same thing. Hoping that it happens, and having faith that it will happen is not really going to do much. If thats all we do then we may as well all support the sentiments, "Nearly certainly not and I suspect the reason will be cancer."

But thats not what Im saying, and maybe I didnt word that right. What Im saying is, lets say that this cause is like seeing a mathamatical possibility that there is a fountain of youth at the top of one of the great mountains in some great mountain range. We have to move as fast as we can to scale every one of those mountains. Whether the fountain is there or not is yet to be seen, if its not there then we die, if it is there then we live. If it is there and we do not move as fast as we can now, then we will have sold ourselves short, indeed we will have thrown away an indefinity of incredible opportunity.

Science speed can only grow so much right, but there is still a lot of room to accellerate, but most of all, there is a enormous amount of room to accellerate in informing the world about this, and getting more support from this cause being main stream world wide. Once the whole world supports this, then science will have all the resources it can handle, and all the labs that it needs, and it will have every thinker available working to crack the immense pool of codes yet to be cracked that hold the answers to stopping the damage accumulations that cause us to age, and keep them from killing us.

If we flip on a bunch of switches like "Nearly certainly not" and you could be right of course, maybe Im wrong, then if that fountain is there we will get there more slowly and millions and even billions will die and have less opportunity to harness the wonders of a seemingly infinite and utterly incredible existence. If we flip on more of these kinds of switches, "This happens at the same rate as the speed at which we all collectively go. Its your contribution that can decide whether we live or die." - then we will get there faster, and we will be able to know once and for all.

We may as well make this an all out quest. I mean, we make a huge billion dollar industry out of things like freaking out about charging an oval pig skin across an imaginary awesome zone, we may as well go all out for the chance to explore existence for indefinity. Other things are worth while and important, but this is the most important. Theres really no reason to prioritize anything above it. Many of us agree with you, it doesnt really matter if we dont die, just like it really doesnt matter if we never get to the point where we can make say, maybe $100,000 a year, or buy that 100 acres with the river that runs through it or whatever, but we strive for it, and since indefinity is the most valuable of those, we may as well put that first.

Edited by brokenportal, 01 November 2009 - 10:52 PM.

[Shannon Vyff]

I joined this forum when I was 27 and I don't have a different view now at 34--I'm signed for cryonics, I support many areas of extreme life extension -from uploading, A.I. development, and nano-tech to biologically ending aging, while also being committed to social action. I'll continue to do the same things for my lifetime, while hoping for major improvements upon the human condition before I die, but not really expecting them as I know how many problems we have at different levels of society around the world and looking at how slowly change happens large scale when looking at history, even recent history. I feel humans must be realistic about their mortality, support life extension but also social action and efforts to increase equality around the world. I expect to die, not knowing whether or not cryonics will work--and that will not matter to me, it will only matter if I'm re-animated ;-). I plan on being proud of what I've given back to my local community and my larger community as an Earth citizen at the end of my life. I'm happy with what I've done so far-and plan on continuing my support of social action and extreme life extension (There are lists other places of what I support with volunteer time and/or financial donations--such as UNICEF, UUSC, Doctor's Without Borders, Union of Concerned Scientists, Save the Children, Sierra Club, WWF and others...along with being a Methuselah Foundation 300 member, the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, CR Society, Alcor, IEET etc.)

[Brain_Ischemia]

Do you think you will reach longevity escape velocity and that you will get a huge lifeextension

No.

Bear in mind, I fully endorse SENS and the efforts of Aubrey de Grey and others.
However, I do not believe that any individual alive today will reach "longevity escape velocity", including myself of course.

I think the concept is perfectly plausible and will probably be a reality sooner or later, but the potential timeframes are grossly overestimated. In other words, reaching longevity escape velocity is probably something for future generations, not ours.

I do believe that with consistent long-term effort (and some luck), I can live long enough to enjoy some benefit from life extension technologies but these will not be enough to extend my life indefinitely even as the pace of technological advancement increases throughout my later years.

EDIT:
As Shannon mentioned, I think cryonics has some fundamental potential but I didn't consider that since it would be "cheating" (ie; you have to die first)
Unfortunately, I'm not convinced that the current implementations of cryonic preservation of humans holds much promise for those of us alive today. The stories about Ted Williams and Alcor aren't very reassuring...

I think you have the right attitude Shannon! None of us should take longevity for granted. I think we should try to get as much done with our lives as we can and safely assume that our time here is precious and fleeting.

Edited by Xanthus, 03 November 2009 - 03:31 PM.

[VidX]

Will I reach it? Idk really, as anybody else, though I kinda think in terms of cancer - it's considered very complex and difficult to solve dissease, though we are pretty close to solving it at the moment, o rat least - progress made is leaps and bounds from where it was started..sooo...keeping in mind how much more advanced the technologies are at the moment, and how rapidly they advance even more I kinda tend to believe it MAY be possible, as all this bio science is getting an information science as Kurzweils says, and IT science will only get better of course, so time frames for "difficult" biological problems should decline significantly too. That's how I see it.

+ I'm ready to use experimental/illegal/unaproved therapies in my later age if I'll see that I'm starting to slow down significantly and there's no horizont of escape velocity anywhere near. And I'm sure there will be plenty of these "underground" labs, there are at the moment actually from what I've red in recent years.


p.s. - I'm kinda sure about another thing (not sure, just feel confident) - the method of the "bioHibernation" will probably be available in 25 to 40 years, and that wouldn't be that bad. I'd probably sign for it even if I'd be healthy (but old).. though it's hard to tell while I'm still young and I have no idea how would I feel at 60+..

Edited by VidX, 03 November 2009 - 03:31 PM.

[brokenportal]

No.

Yes.

We can, that doesnt mean that we will, but one of the main differences between can and will is do. If we all start thinking no, then who is going to want to put in the time and do what it takes to help with this?

If we say no then less people are going to do. At this point we have maybe 1/2 half of 1 percent of the supporters that we will have. Technology doubles, and doubles, and doubles, and there is always new technologies coming out. Not to mention, hypothetically, in Longevity Escape Velocity, you only have to survive until the first breakthroughs get here to live indefinitely. Those first breakthroughs can very well get here pretty fast, depending on the speed, and depending on the ambition we are willing to go with. I say we move like our lives depend on it, and like a grand, gracious, spacious sea, of incredible mystery as a reward is at stake. I say yes, we can all have indefinite life extension, but first we have to all be willing to do what it takes to motivate the world to see if we can make this happen.

[VidX]

Yep, I'm actually up in this as much as I'm able.. The least I can do is donate whenever I can to SENS and other projects and to spread the word (I'm doing this already).

[forever freedom]

To me whether we reach LEV or not depends on computer/AI developments. To me the question is whether we'll be able to build strong AI in our lifetimes or not. If we don't, i don't think that we're smart enough and have enough technology to cure aging in this century.

[Berserker]

I joined this forum when I was 27 and I don't have a different view now at 34--I'm signed for cryonics, I support many areas of extreme life extension -from uploading, A.I. development, and nano-tech to biologically ending aging, while also being committed to social action. I'll continue to do the same things for my lifetime, while hoping for major improvements upon the human condition before I die, but not really expecting them as I know how many problems we have at different levels of society around the world and looking at how slowly change happens large scale when looking at history, even recent history. I feel humans must be realistic about their mortality, support life extension but also social action and efforts to increase equality around the world. I expect to die, not knowing whether or not cryonics will work--and that will not matter to me, it will only matter if I'm re-animated ;-). I plan on being proud of what I've given back to my local community and my larger community as an Earth citizen at the end of my life. I'm happy with what I've done so far-and plan on continuing my support of social action and extreme life extension (There are lists other places of what I support with volunteer time and/or financial donations--such as UNICEF, UUSC, Doctor's Without Borders, Union of Concerned Scientists, Save the Children, Sierra Club, WWF and others...along with being a Methuselah Foundation 300 member, the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, CR Society, Alcor, IEET etc.)

I agree with you in almost everything. However, i disagree in the part of cryonics. Your are young, and I really thing that in the next 20-50 years cryonics is going to improve a lot, so it will be possible by then to know if its going to work or not. The most dangerous thing is going to be external factors I think, in the term of cryonics.

[brokenportal]

Yep, I'm actually up in this as much as I'm able.. The least I can do is donate whenever I can to SENS and other projects and to spread the word (I'm doing this already).

Thats the spirit. I think most of us if we aren't already displaying it, have this spirit in us. Its people like you that continue to help bring it out by example. If I could I would pay volunteers like you $1,000 an hour. Your support is truely priceless.

[VidX]

I feel you brokenportal, I'm actually already grateful for a person like you, who invests so much time and effort into this, even if we won't succeed, it's the only thing really worth trying as much as possible. Keep up the brilliant work!

[imagenesis]

lol when I was 16-17 I honestly thought De Grey was going to pull it off. Then I realized how ridiculous his claims are. I'm pretty confident De Grey's and Kurzheils claims are going to be epic failures and that living past 120ish won't happen without cloning/head transplants or mechanical support of brains. They should just focus on regenerative treatments for the brain/skull, the body is fucked. Nanotechnology is still constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

LOL, cryonics does irreparable damage to tissue, you guys are wasting your money. Again, nanotechnology is constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

200 years from now, people are going to be driving really fast automated vehicles, computers will be more prevalent, but that's about it.



I sure hope I get to see strong AI, that would be incredible. World peace? I doubt it. Islam will never stop fighting, than again it might mean autonomous robotic infantry and complete automation of supply chain so who knows...

Edited by imagenesis, 05 November 2009 - 01:19 PM.

[forever freedom]

lol when I was 16-17 I honestly thought De Grey was going to pull it off. Then I realized how ridiculous his claims are. I'm pretty confident De Grey's and Kurzheils claims are going to be epic failures and that living past 120ish won't happen without cloning/head transplants or mechanical support of brains. They should just focus on regenerative treatments for the brain/skull, the body is fucked. Nanotechnology is still constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

LOL, cryonics does irreparable damage to tissue, you guys are wasting your money. Again, nanotechnology is constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

200 years from now, people are going to be driving really fast automated vehicles, computers will be more prevalent, but that's about it.



I sure hope I get to see strong AI, that would be incredible. World peace? I doubt it. Islam will never stop fighting, than again it might mean autonomous robotic infantry and complete automation of supply chain so who knows...

To speak so confidently, I bet you didn't even take a deeper look at DeGrey's and Kurzweil's works, neither have you taken a deeper look at cryonics. Have you read any book by Kurzweil and DeGrey?

Edited by forever freedom, 05 November 2009 - 01:47 PM.

[VidX]

lol when I was 16-17 I honestly thought De Grey was going to pull it off. Then I realized how ridiculous his claims are. I'm pretty confident De Grey's and Kurzheils claims are going to be epic failures and that living past 120ish won't happen without cloning/head transplants or mechanical support of brains. They should just focus on regenerative treatments for the brain/skull, the body is fucked. Nanotechnology is still constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

LOL, cryonics does irreparable damage to tissue, you guys are wasting your money. Again, nanotechnology is constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

200 years from now, people are going to be driving really fast automated vehicles, computers will be more prevalent, but that's about it.



I sure hope I get to see strong AI, that would be incredible. World peace? I doubt it. Islam will never stop fighting, than again it might mean autonomous robotic infantry and complete automation of supply chain so who knows...

What's with the ranting about?

[Delorean]

lol when I was 16-17 I honestly thought De Grey was going to pull it off. Then I realized how ridiculous his claims are. I'm pretty confident De Grey's and Kurzheils claims are going to be epic failures and that living past 120ish won't happen without cloning/head transplants or mechanical support of brains. They should just focus on regenerative treatments for the brain/skull, the body is fucked. Nanotechnology is still constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

LOL, cryonics does irreparable damage to tissue, you guys are wasting your money. Again, nanotechnology is constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

200 years from now, people are going to be driving really fast automated vehicles, computers will be more prevalent, but that's about it.



I sure hope I get to see strong AI, that would be incredible. World peace? I doubt it. Islam will never stop fighting, than again it might mean autonomous robotic infantry and complete automation of supply chain so who knows...

That post is so confused i don't even know where to start.....

[Brain_Ischemia]

lol when I was 16-17 I honestly thought De Grey was going to pull it off. Then I realized how ridiculous his claims are. I'm pretty confident De Grey's and Kurzheils claims are going to be epic failures and that living past 120ish won't happen without cloning/head transplants or mechanical support of brains. They should just focus on regenerative treatments for the brain/skull, the body is fucked. Nanotechnology is still constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

LOL, cryonics does irreparable damage to tissue, you guys are wasting your money. Again, nanotechnology is constrained by chemistry and laws of physics.

I absolutely agree that Kurzweil is WAY off on the singularity timeline. De Grey is also probably off, but likely not by much. But I don't think you have much firm footing to making the sweeping conclusion that their predictions are *absolutely* NOT going to happen and indeed constrained by the laws of physics. In fact, I don't think you have a firm appreciation of what the laws of physics allow; you won't find any reputable physicist who will say on the record definitively that Kurzweil's singularity or De Grey's Methuselarity actually violate ANY laws of physics. The simple reason is that they don't.

As far as nanotechnology, there's a giant gaping hole in your logic.
You say that nanotechnology will never be able to treat our bodies due to constraints in the laws of physics and chemistry... Ummmm...biology itself is a kind of "nanotechnology", everything from mitochondrian to complex networks of neurons are natural machines that obviously don't in any way way, shape, or form violate any laws of physics. Natural, undirected processes caused these nano-machines to come about, why should intelligently designed machines be any less capable?

200 years from now, people are going to be driving really fast automated vehicles, computers will be more prevalent, but that's about it.

I honestly hope you live long enough to laugh at that statement some day.
Heck, I'm not even sure you really appreciate the advances that have been made just in the last few decades. Thirty years ago things that seem like mundane, every day parts of our lives didn't exist: the internet, desktop and laptop PCs in every household, cellphones, smartphones, ipods, DVR, persistent world MMO video games, dahsboard GPS in cars, Google Earth, Youtube (I could go on and on).....and the not so mundane things like working machine-brain interface based prosthetics, the Kepler space telescope (capable of detecting small Earth size planets thousands of light years away), the Large Hadron Collider, humanoid robots which can move/walk autonomously with fluid and complex articulation of limbs, legs, etc (not to mention burgeoning AI), invisibility/cloaking proof of concept, military UAVs, remote surgery via telepresence, etc.... And this is all just off the top of my head.

In 1980, how many of those things would you have predicted to exist in 30 years?

Edited by Xanthus, 08 November 2009 - 01:03 AM.

[Berserker]

200 years ago Napoleon was fighting in Europe, riding a horse. The Word we live today has nothing to do which the world where he lived 200 years ago. So, in the next 200 years the world will be very different as well.