It’s quite hard for me to see how this is an attempt to feel better?
It does correspond to low vs. high openness or to N vs S in MBTI, among other things, but so what?
Feminism and abolitionism are political claims that needed mass movements. Cryonics is a technology ready for adoption.
Feminism and abolitionism are political claims that needed mass movements. Cryonics is a technology ready for adoption.
Yes, but what does this distinction prove? They’re all unfamiliar ideas that people have to evaluate in far mode, so they need time and effort to reach the masses. Cryonics could be a religion instead of a technology and still face the same hurdle. Many technologies that were ready for adoption never caught on.
You are not saying anything everyone doesn’t already know, so you can’t expect anyone to change their mind. By bringing it up like this, you are creating noise, and no progress. Write up a top-level post summarizing the argument if you still consider it strong, but don’t dilute the discussion with repetition.
That word “Ready for adoption”, I do not think it means what you think it means.
I think highly original people need feedback of how their notions are received by (more) general public, specifically when they pertain to the general public.
I should mention that I am PRO cryonics, I just think the technology carries a level of uncertainty that general public is not used to, hence it’s not “ready for adoption” for general public and people who want to promote cryonics will do better addressing this issue (either directing resources to solving the problem and making people more comfortable with the uncertainty) than wishing it away.
In this case, stating in the original comment that you were disputing definition of a word would make the point of the comment much clearer. (Although I don’t see how this revelation translates into an improvement of signal/noise.)
It’s quite hard for me to see how this is an attempt to feel better? It does correspond to low vs. high openness or to N vs S in MBTI, among other things, but so what? Feminism and abolitionism are political claims that needed mass movements. Cryonics is a technology ready for adoption.
Feminism was (and is) a set of behavioural patterns ready for adoption.
The difference doesn’t seem that big to me.
Yes, but what does this distinction prove? They’re all unfamiliar ideas that people have to evaluate in far mode, so they need time and effort to reach the masses. Cryonics could be a religion instead of a technology and still face the same hurdle. Many technologies that were ready for adoption never caught on.
It’s ready for adoption when they unfreeze somebody, or at least something (animal).
As a side note, I do not even see research efforts in this area. I googled.
Edit per Vlad’s suggestion: I am not arguing on value of cryonics, but on the definition of “ready for adoption” as seen by general public.
You are not saying anything everyone doesn’t already know, so you can’t expect anyone to change their mind. By bringing it up like this, you are creating noise, and no progress. Write up a top-level post summarizing the argument if you still consider it strong, but don’t dilute the discussion with repetition.
I was replying in the sense of
That word “Ready for adoption”, I do not think it means what you think it means.
I think highly original people need feedback of how their notions are received by (more) general public, specifically when they pertain to the general public.
I should mention that I am PRO cryonics, I just think the technology carries a level of uncertainty that general public is not used to, hence it’s not “ready for adoption” for general public and people who want to promote cryonics will do better addressing this issue (either directing resources to solving the problem and making people more comfortable with the uncertainty) than wishing it away.
In this case, stating in the original comment that you were disputing definition of a word would make the point of the comment much clearer. (Although I don’t see how this revelation translates into an improvement of signal/noise.)