Could you clarify who the “target audience” is? I’ve long wondered about the apparent gap between the universal anti-deathism the Lesswrong community ostensibly espouses and the blase attitude on display as to the affordability of cryonics.
My guess: many LessWrongers are students or relatively recent graduates in highly specialised fields, so while their finances may currently average pretty low, it is common for them to believe they will eventually become, if not wealthy, at least well-off enough to be able to afford the costs of cryonic insurance.
While I’ve never managed to get an exact figure from someone who is signed up—I cannot fathom why, and it mildly annoys me—the vibe I get is that it’s expensive but not outrageously so, and easily affordable for an upper-middle class person.
While I’ve never managed to get an exact figure from someone who is signed up
I just e-mailed my life insurance guy to check. This July I need to send them a check for $401.70. This will cover me for the subsequent year. The payment may become less over the years as complicated financial things happen, I am informed. I went with a whole-life policy so I don’t have to deal with the headache of obtaining insurance more than once over my lifetime, so this is probably more expensive than what people with more headache-tolerance will be able to get.
Edit: Oh, and I’m young, and while I am not exactly the picture of health, I’m not unusually unwell in any of the ways they tend to check for, so this may be cheaper than what someone older or otherwise actuarially disadvantaged might get.
Perhaps I should clarify my interest. Why isn’t making cryonics affordable for as many people as possible the priority, rather than focusing on marketing to people most similar to oneself? Looks an awful lot like tribalism.
Making it more affordable might have only a marginal impact, if most people are opposed for reasons other than price. I do think there should be some kind of charity raising funds for those who can’t afford it—but I’m not clear on there being much of a demand for such a thing if it existed.
I don’t understand the question. How would a non-engineer like myself go about making it more affordable if not through economies of scale?
ETA: You mean donating money for this purpose? People do give money to the main organizations beyond the required amount. But sbharris wrote here about surprising people refusing free cryo-preservation. So throwing more money at the problem without first understanding this aspect and thinking of a way to address it seems unattractive.
Convincing people who can afford cryonics has a relatively straightforward solution, while decreasing the cost of cryonics is a complex technical and economic challenge. The fastest way to sign people up seems to be to convince the people who can already afford it. That does not mean though that effort should not be applied to the long term goal of lowering the cost though.
All else equal, it’s easier to sell widgets to young people for $X/month each than to middle aged people for $10X/month each or old people for $1000X each.
Someone who wanted to sell widgets equally as much to all people would focus most effort on the first group.
I think it’s like the transplant list phenomenon. Give people a list with 200 people and their survival chances, and they will distribute 100 organs to the 100 with the highest chance to live. Give them two lists of 100, they will instead distribute 50 organs to members of each list. I think I saw that here, but don’t know the link.
On top of that, the more orders for widgets you get, the lower the cost you can make them at.
I’ve signed up with CI and I am paying for it with life insurance. I am 24 and in perfect health, so I was able to get a Universal Life insurance for $72.50 a month. It’s locked into this rate for the rest of my life.
Alcor recently raised their suspension minimum to $200k for full body. CI only charges $28k. There are complex reasons for this difference, including that CI does not consider it their responsibility to provide standby-stabilization, and Alcor uses a more expensive preservation solution (the one used for vitrifying a rabbit kidney). Both of these figures are the amounts you would pay from your life insurance. They both also have ongoing membership costs. (IIRC Alcor charges $600 and CI $120, but there are discounts for couples and maybe students.)
You don’t have to pay ongoing membership costs if you cough up a lump sum. I did this with CI; it set me back $1,250 and I never have to think about it again.
Could you clarify who the “target audience” is? I’ve long wondered about the apparent gap between the universal anti-deathism the Lesswrong community ostensibly espouses and the blase attitude on display as to the affordability of cryonics.
My guess: many LessWrongers are students or relatively recent graduates in highly specialised fields, so while their finances may currently average pretty low, it is common for them to believe they will eventually become, if not wealthy, at least well-off enough to be able to afford the costs of cryonic insurance.
While I’ve never managed to get an exact figure from someone who is signed up—I cannot fathom why, and it mildly annoys me—the vibe I get is that it’s expensive but not outrageously so, and easily affordable for an upper-middle class person.
I just e-mailed my life insurance guy to check. This July I need to send them a check for $401.70. This will cover me for the subsequent year. The payment may become less over the years as complicated financial things happen, I am informed. I went with a whole-life policy so I don’t have to deal with the headache of obtaining insurance more than once over my lifetime, so this is probably more expensive than what people with more headache-tolerance will be able to get.
Edit: Oh, and I’m young, and while I am not exactly the picture of health, I’m not unusually unwell in any of the ways they tend to check for, so this may be cheaper than what someone older or otherwise actuarially disadvantaged might get.
Perhaps I should clarify my interest. Why isn’t making cryonics affordable for as many people as possible the priority, rather than focusing on marketing to people most similar to oneself? Looks an awful lot like tribalism.
Making it more affordable might have only a marginal impact, if most people are opposed for reasons other than price. I do think there should be some kind of charity raising funds for those who can’t afford it—but I’m not clear on there being much of a demand for such a thing if it existed.
I don’t understand the question. How would a non-engineer like myself go about making it more affordable if not through economies of scale?
ETA: You mean donating money for this purpose? People do give money to the main organizations beyond the required amount. But sbharris wrote here about surprising people refusing free cryo-preservation. So throwing more money at the problem without first understanding this aspect and thinking of a way to address it seems unattractive.
Convincing people who can afford cryonics has a relatively straightforward solution, while decreasing the cost of cryonics is a complex technical and economic challenge. The fastest way to sign people up seems to be to convince the people who can already afford it. That does not mean though that effort should not be applied to the long term goal of lowering the cost though.
The more people are signed up, the more resources will be available to address cost reduction.
Also, it seems like cryonics might work quite well with economies of scale.
The usual link on this: http://lesswrong.com/lw/2f5/cryonics_and_scaling_factors/
All else equal, it’s easier to sell widgets to young people for $X/month each than to middle aged people for $10X/month each or old people for $1000X each.
Someone who wanted to sell widgets equally as much to all people would focus most effort on the first group.
I think it’s like the transplant list phenomenon. Give people a list with 200 people and their survival chances, and they will distribute 100 organs to the 100 with the highest chance to live. Give them two lists of 100, they will instead distribute 50 organs to members of each list. I think I saw that here, but don’t know the link.
On top of that, the more orders for widgets you get, the lower the cost you can make them at.
I’ve signed up with CI and I am paying for it with life insurance. I am 24 and in perfect health, so I was able to get a Universal Life insurance for $72.50 a month. It’s locked into this rate for the rest of my life.
Alcor recently raised their suspension minimum to $200k for full body. CI only charges $28k. There are complex reasons for this difference, including that CI does not consider it their responsibility to provide standby-stabilization, and Alcor uses a more expensive preservation solution (the one used for vitrifying a rabbit kidney). Both of these figures are the amounts you would pay from your life insurance. They both also have ongoing membership costs. (IIRC Alcor charges $600 and CI $120, but there are discounts for couples and maybe students.)
You don’t have to pay ongoing membership costs if you cough up a lump sum. I did this with CI; it set me back $1,250 and I never have to think about it again.