I thought them low, and was mildly surprised. Partly because the cryonics subculture is briefly mentioned in Neal Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon and I assumed that the subculture has persisted since at least 1997 (when Stephenson was writing the novel), I concluded that two thousand was a low estimation—simply because a subculture that could not accrue more members is in my eyes a pitiable thing (evoking of pathos). Considering how long Cryonics has been possible, I had thought more than a couple thousand of people would have ever been cryo-preserved. Although I doubt those figures represent all cryo-preserved persons.
Taking my prior advice into account, that’s a lot of assumptions, I know. I have not researched cryonics thoroughly, as I’d like to understand enough of the neuroscience to form my own opinion. With my current level of knowledge I have low confidence in cryonics; the degree to which extreme cold destroys brain matter (on a molecular level) is one issue.
I doubt those figures represent all cryo-preserved persons.
I seem to have described my numbers a bit off, so I’ll try again to try to make sure the confusion is cleared up:
There are currently around 2,000 living people who are members of cryo organizations.
There are currently around 200 dead (or ‘dead’) people who have been cryo-preserved.
the degree to which extreme cold destroys brain matter (on a molecular level) is one issue.
I don’t disagree with you about that. However, given the range of options currently available on the table, if I have a lethal heart attack this year… there don’t seem to really be any other options I /can/ make arrangements for. It’s possible that the damage you describe will, one day, eventually be able to be repaired; in which case, no worries. Or, it’s possible the damage you describe will never be able to be repaired; in which case, in another sense, no worries.
(Part of my current consultations with my lawyer about my will, is to arrange for as much of my personal writing and similar data to be stored with me—and at least part of the reasoning for my doing that, is to provide another set of data about the way my brain functions in case it might help with future repair efforts. It’s even more of a longshot than cryo itself, but since I’d like to have that data with me anyway if I’m revived, it doesn’t seem to be a negative.)
Those figures surprise me.
Aside from noting smiley faces seem to have the power to compel compliance, I will try to follow my own advice.
In which direction, and to what degree?
I thought them low, and was mildly surprised. Partly because the cryonics subculture is briefly mentioned in Neal Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon and I assumed that the subculture has persisted since at least 1997 (when Stephenson was writing the novel), I concluded that two thousand was a low estimation—simply because a subculture that could not accrue more members is in my eyes a pitiable thing (evoking of pathos). Considering how long Cryonics has been possible, I had thought more than a couple thousand of people would have ever been cryo-preserved. Although I doubt those figures represent all cryo-preserved persons.
Taking my prior advice into account, that’s a lot of assumptions, I know. I have not researched cryonics thoroughly, as I’d like to understand enough of the neuroscience to form my own opinion. With my current level of knowledge I have low confidence in cryonics; the degree to which extreme cold destroys brain matter (on a molecular level) is one issue.
I seem to have described my numbers a bit off, so I’ll try again to try to make sure the confusion is cleared up:
There are currently around 2,000 living people who are members of cryo organizations.
There are currently around 200 dead (or ‘dead’) people who have been cryo-preserved.
I don’t disagree with you about that. However, given the range of options currently available on the table, if I have a lethal heart attack this year… there don’t seem to really be any other options I /can/ make arrangements for. It’s possible that the damage you describe will, one day, eventually be able to be repaired; in which case, no worries. Or, it’s possible the damage you describe will never be able to be repaired; in which case, in another sense, no worries.
(Part of my current consultations with my lawyer about my will, is to arrange for as much of my personal writing and similar data to be stored with me—and at least part of the reasoning for my doing that, is to provide another set of data about the way my brain functions in case it might help with future repair efforts. It’s even more of a longshot than cryo itself, but since I’d like to have that data with me anyway if I’m revived, it doesn’t seem to be a negative.)