-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Want to live forever? You probably will have that option!
- Thread starter Kimawolf
- Start date
- Status
Explain?
Governments have everything to gain by subsidizing and promoting it.
Abstruse Moose
Member
Sign me up. No interest in the whole death thing. Very overrated.
For citizens that contribute, whatever that may be. The state is not an instrument of altruism.
SwiftDeath
Member
*Assuming you have a small to medium fortune at least
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
The only reason I hate working is because I know it's robbing me of the precious little time I have on this planet. If you suddenly give me triple that time? I don't think working would be so onerous a burden.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Only the rich and affluent will ever get access to this tech. If available.
You want Donald Trump to live forever?
You want Donald Trump to live forever?
Orbis Tabula
Member
Hell yeah, fuck the haters. Let's invent eternal life and worry about the consequences later. I don't want people dying.
Trickle down immortality.
A Fish Aficionado
I am going to make it through this year if it kills me
Pilgrimzero
Member
And you can be damn sure only the elite would have access to it.
Then you truly will have 2 different societies and just a matter of time until unrest explodes.
Then you truly will have 2 different societies and just a matter of time until unrest explodes.
Orbis Tabula
Member
Jesus Christ you guys are cynical
Unknown Soldier
Member
Please look forward to a world where the rich live forever and the poor live normal length human lives.
This will inevitably lead to armed rebellion and world war. What happens after that depends on if we use nukes on ourselves or not.
This will inevitably lead to armed rebellion and world war. What happens after that depends on if we use nukes on ourselves or not.
AMERICA IS GOING TO BE GREAT AGAIN YEE HAW
Why would that be bad? You're unethical for suggesting that everyone from the 1800s deserved a painful/sick end even if a cure for aging were available at the time.
Pamplemousse
Member
What? Aging isn't a disease. Death is necessary.
Forget the whole economic disparity causing only the elite to get access to it most likely. I just dont see the medical breakthroughs even happening within any living persons lifetime. Or their kids lifeitmes tbh.
God Dayumm
Banned
Life is too short to unlock the real potential of humans. Increased longevity plus legal assisted suicide (for those that get tired of living) will bring many benefits to society
Lol what is this garbage? Just because this is your philosophical stance on death doesn't mean that this is the way it has to be for others.
It wouldn't be bad!
I could have sworn you were being sarcastic...
What?
Alzheimer's Disease, Cancer, Arteriolar sclerosis, Heart disease, etc. You know diseases we call "diseases of old age", are not diseases? This is news to me. What do you think old people die from?
Did I cross into an alternate reality where life saving and quality of life improving technologies and medicine (chemotherapy, organ transplants, antibiotics, wheel chairs, pacemakers, HIV drugs, Malaria drugs etc.) are not available to the general public? Somebody help me figure this out.
Wait do you guys also not have what would basically be considered super computers a couple of decades ago as hand held devices sold for around 200$ in this reality?
SDCowboy
Member
That isn't garbage. Death is necessary or the world would overpopulate in a matter of years. There would have to be radical changes to rules and laws of child birth by limiting it substantially.
There are many more medical professionals and some government contracted companies and medical researchers who want to consider aging a disease and don't view it as necessary.
Also never thought there would be so many cynics. If you were born before 1990 you were alive for one major tech shift already.
The internet.
That shit was the stuff of sci fi for most people in the early 80s before suddenly in 1990 the "world wide web" exploded on the scene.
I imagine there were back then in the early 80s and late 70s saying the same shit:
"No way you could create a World wide network accessable by tiny wireless devices no less! This ain't Startrek!"
With another guy saying "even if you did it'd only be for the rich. No way the government and rich folk will let normal people get unlimited access to so much knowledge!"
And yet here we are, all communicating from all over the world on tiny devices with more or close to the computing power of super computers in the 90s (many were under 1 tf btw).
SaganIsGOAT
Junior Member
So how exactly is Earth going to handle humans who have doubled or tripled their lifespan? That is a lot more time per person than usual, which unless we are intelligent with this technology, will just lead to more people on this planet at once. Unless we get our population in check expanding our lifespans should take a back seat.
half a moon
Banned
I'd like this but in reality it's out of reach for me. Time, money, something.
It sucks to think about a world where the have nots live for 30-70 years and the haves hundreds or even thousans. That's capitalism for you. What an awesome idea. What way can 1%-10% of the population greatly benefit. Let's do it!! Slavery in all but name.
It sucks to think about a world where the have nots live for 30-70 years and the haves hundreds or even thousans. That's capitalism for you. What an awesome idea. What way can 1%-10% of the population greatly benefit. Let's do it!! Slavery in all but name.
I guess space colonies, mars, etc.
God Dayumm
Banned
They go to sleep peacefully and without any pain. They just don't wake up again! Because uhmmm... Theirs cells shut down or something /s
Having the tech to essentially make you live forever (barring dying from a disease or getting killed) is a MUCH bigger technological achievement than the internet tbh, making it that much harder to achieve. I'd say it's being more realistic than cynical.
WrenchNinja
Member
Get rich or die trying
I know but my point was we have had major tech breakthroughs before which have fundementally changed every facet of the world, and it was not hoarded by the rich or held back. Even when thought impossible, look at us now!
Aaronrules380
Member
I honestly think that even if this is possible, it isn't a path that people should pursue because of a number of incredibly dangerous possibilities that arise from it (Such as immortal dictators, an even greater population explosion than we already know that could lead us to sucking the earth dry, etc.)
SaganIsGOAT
Junior Member
Lets hope we colonize responsibly!
Ricky Ricardo
Member
.
The fun really begins when you imagine the poor bastards a few generations on.
I think bringing an ethical dimension into this is a mistake, because that will not be the primary argument for giving people long lives. History is full of primitive cultures being eliminated off the face of the earth in the name of progress, and an objective argument can be made that mankind is the better for it. The question isn't if you want to live a long life, the question is going to be if other people want you to live a long life.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked