

The wasteful quest for immortality - lacero
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428690.400-the-wasteful-quest-for-immortality.html

======
orangecat
A bunch of empty platitudes that have been addressed repeatedly by the pro-
life side.

Quantity vs quality: yes, quality of life is extremely important. And that's
significantly impaired when you can't go to the bathroom unassisted or
identify your children.

Inequality: all technologies are unevenly distributed at first, and then
prices fall. And it's even less of a problem here, because curing aging would
tremendously reduce medical costs. Governments and health insurers would
likely profit by providing treatment for free.

Overpopulation: last I heard birth rates were falling rapidly, and global
population was projected to peak in this century. Meanwhile there's a whole
universe out there; talk to me again when we've filled half the Milky Way.

 _We haven't recovered from the idea that growing old is an awful disaster,
which must somehow be put off._

Having your body and mind slowly degenerate (assuming you're lucky; quickly if
you're not) is in fact awful.

 _If nothing awful happens to you, you go on doing what you're doing and
looking for more._

If "nothing" happens to you by 90, meaning that you're physically and mentally
able take care for yourself, then you're more fortunate than most. A healthy
lifestyle can improve your chances, but isn't anywhere close to a guarantee.

 _When he found he was dying of cancer, Steve Jobs made this interesting
remark, that it was the best thing that ever happened to him because it made
his priorities clear. He said nobody wants to die but it is life's best
invention, it is the mechanism of change. He had a point._

And then he spent vast resources trying to get cured. Another case of stated
preferences versus revealed preferences.

------
Mz
I will note that the remark about quality of life vs. quantity is a quote from
a nonagenerian. Easy for them to say. They likely had both to make it that
far.

