

I Don't See Any Evidence That We'll Live Hundreds Of Years - elmarks
http://blog.edwardmarks.com/post/29831573387/i-dont-see-any-evidence-that-well-live-hundreds-of

======
Metatron
This was brilliant. A really good depth of analysis and the kind of
statistical forecasting that I like, but I'm not sure that it holds too much
water.

Sure the analysis holds for current types of anti-aging, life prolonging
techniques, but does it hold for the future?

It's like charting the average 100m run of Humans since the dawn of time, and
then claiming that, as a race, we'll never break the sound barrier. But then
someone invents the car.

And I think that's a good, strong analogy, because the things we're looking
into now aren't just life-prolonging, they are age-defying. It's a complete
shift. As Marks remarks perhaps we can't predict how it's going to happen, you
can't predict everything after all, especially not new technology.

To me a better analysis would have looked at statements about what is required
to stop the aging process altogether and analysed our progress in those
fields. For instance does it require the accurate mapping of our DNA? A task
that can be completed, and isn't an endless goal like 'living to X years' is.

There are also completely off the wall developments that don't fit in the
trend lines that Marks has forecast like the role of replacing our bodies with
machines. Such things deserve their own trend line, and again such a thing
wouldn't progress towards infinity, cumulatively, but would have an end point
in terms of allowing us to live indefinitely. There may be endless
improvements we could make to a synthetic body, but making it endlessly
maintainable would be a relatively early goal.

