Is it wrong/biased to believe we should prioritize extending the longevity of our current bodies over “life extension” projects that can only work with brain emulation/simulation? It strikes me as far more likely to gain public support, or at least gain mainstream approval.
Plastination and brain scanning already has a great deal of mainstream approval, with large projects underway at mainstream places like Harvard, because the scientific benefits for neuroscience are so compelling & obvious.
Oh, did you mean support for the emulation part? Well, the nice thing about your brain being plastinated is that you can afford to wait a few decades/centuries in a way you can’t if you’re cryopreserved and organizational continuity is a serious problem.
Yes, that’s basically my concern. I’m aware of the value of tissue preservation for other, “conventional” fields of medicine and science, but developing perfect preservation is just the first step in actually extending human lives. The second step—reanimation or emulation—strikes me as far more controversial and far more difficult as well. I understand the argument that we can postpone this step indefinitely once we’ve got preservation figured out, but, as I was saying, most people tend to think of their current bodies when they think “life extension”.
I’m with you; of the items that christina originally listed, SENS is the really important one. Nonbiological nanodevices or nanoconstructs might be useful as delivery systems or probes, but mostly we should be interested in biology all the way, e.g. designer bacteria as “medical nanobots”. Full-spectrum nanotechnology, and techniques for storing brain information, are really about opening the abyss of posthuman possibilities, and that’s a severe challenge whose resolution ought to be intimately involved with however the human attempt at coexistence with artificial intelligence works out. But human rejuvenation is comparatively :-) straightforward and should be on everyone’s to-do list.
Is it wrong/biased to believe we should prioritize extending the longevity of our current bodies over “life extension” projects that can only work with brain emulation/simulation? It strikes me as far more likely to gain public support, or at least gain mainstream approval.
Plastination and brain scanning already has a great deal of mainstream approval, with large projects underway at mainstream places like Harvard, because the scientific benefits for neuroscience are so compelling & obvious.
Oh, did you mean support for the emulation part? Well, the nice thing about your brain being plastinated is that you can afford to wait a few decades/centuries in a way you can’t if you’re cryopreserved and organizational continuity is a serious problem.
Or did you mean expected value? I don’t expect much from mainstream medicine since it has failed to extend old-age longevity much, and even if SENS or caloric restriction was surprisingly successful and extends life by a few decades, you still die in a few decades. Background reading: http://lesswrong.com/lw/5qm/living_forever_is_hard_or_the_gompertz_curve/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/7jh/living_forever_is_hard_part_2_adult_longevity/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/bl3/living_forever_is_hard_part_3_the_state_of_life/
Yes, that’s basically my concern. I’m aware of the value of tissue preservation for other, “conventional” fields of medicine and science, but developing perfect preservation is just the first step in actually extending human lives. The second step—reanimation or emulation—strikes me as far more controversial and far more difficult as well. I understand the argument that we can postpone this step indefinitely once we’ve got preservation figured out, but, as I was saying, most people tend to think of their current bodies when they think “life extension”.
I’m with you; of the items that christina originally listed, SENS is the really important one. Nonbiological nanodevices or nanoconstructs might be useful as delivery systems or probes, but mostly we should be interested in biology all the way, e.g. designer bacteria as “medical nanobots”. Full-spectrum nanotechnology, and techniques for storing brain information, are really about opening the abyss of posthuman possibilities, and that’s a severe challenge whose resolution ought to be intimately involved with however the human attempt at coexistence with artificial intelligence works out. But human rejuvenation is comparatively :-) straightforward and should be on everyone’s to-do list.