Is anyone aware of any article discussing scalability issues?
I agree that from an individual standpoint it is rational to sign up for cryonics but is it really a good idea for mankind in general to massively sign up for cryonics? Would it not create an awful drag on the economy that would delay or maybe even prevent mankind to acquire the technology necessary for reviving the “dead”?
From what I read on the business model of Alcor and CI, the costs of sustaining cryonisation are paid by the dividends/interests of a small capital constituted through life insurance. If more and more people enter cryonisation, there will be more and more of that capital that needs to find investment opportunities. Is it economically feasible to provide capital revenue for an ever growing amount of capital?
Has someone really considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals the number of the living? Has someone considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals ten times the number of the living?
I saw “economies of scale” mentioned a number of time. Have those economies of scale been quantified? Are they real or is it a magical word? What if we do not manage to grow the energy supply fast enough to ensure cryostasis for everyone?
Have the ethical implications of the risk posed to future generations potential economic and technological growth by massive cryonisation been considered? What if what I pay for my cryonisation would be better used in medical or AI research? What if that money could be used to accelerate the coming of “immortality” for my grand-children? What if my cryonisation slows down or prevents the coming of “immortality” for everyone (including myself but also my grand-children)?
If more and more people enter cryonisation, there will be more and more of that capital that needs to find investment opportunities. Is it economically feasible to provide capital revenue for an ever growing amount of capital?
I think it depends on whether there are good ideas which haven’t been funded, and whether the economic and social structure is such as to take advantage of the good ideas.
You might be interested in The Great Stagnation by Tyler Cowan—as I understand it, he argues that economic grow has slowed in the developed countries (just the US?) because of a lack of good ideas.
I’ve heard the theory that the recent recession can be traced back to unduly low interest rates, which led to vast amounts of capital wandering the world searching for excessively high returns, and therefore vulnerable to scams.
Has someone really considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals the number of the living? Has someone considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals ten times the number of the living?
In science fiction, there’s Why Call Them Back from Heaven? by Simak and Cryoburn by Bujold.
Is anyone aware of any article discussing scalability issues?
I agree that from an individual standpoint it is rational to sign up for cryonics but is it really a good idea for mankind in general to massively sign up for cryonics? Would it not create an awful drag on the economy that would delay or maybe even prevent mankind to acquire the technology necessary for reviving the “dead”?
From what I read on the business model of Alcor and CI, the costs of sustaining cryonisation are paid by the dividends/interests of a small capital constituted through life insurance. If more and more people enter cryonisation, there will be more and more of that capital that needs to find investment opportunities. Is it economically feasible to provide capital revenue for an ever growing amount of capital?
Has someone really considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals the number of the living? Has someone considered a society where the number of the “dead” equals ten times the number of the living?
I saw “economies of scale” mentioned a number of time. Have those economies of scale been quantified? Are they real or is it a magical word? What if we do not manage to grow the energy supply fast enough to ensure cryostasis for everyone?
Have the ethical implications of the risk posed to future generations potential economic and technological growth by massive cryonisation been considered? What if what I pay for my cryonisation would be better used in medical or AI research? What if that money could be used to accelerate the coming of “immortality” for my grand-children? What if my cryonisation slows down or prevents the coming of “immortality” for everyone (including myself but also my grand-children)?
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2f5/cryonics_wants_to_be_big/
I think it depends on whether there are good ideas which haven’t been funded, and whether the economic and social structure is such as to take advantage of the good ideas.
You might be interested in The Great Stagnation by Tyler Cowan—as I understand it, he argues that economic grow has slowed in the developed countries (just the US?) because of a lack of good ideas.
I’ve heard the theory that the recent recession can be traced back to unduly low interest rates, which led to vast amounts of capital wandering the world searching for excessively high returns, and therefore vulnerable to scams.
In science fiction, there’s Why Call Them Back from Heaven? by Simak and Cryoburn by Bujold.
Thanks to both of you for your pointers.