guardian.co.uk — Aubrey de Grey, the molecular biologist explains how he aims to help human beings live to be 1,000. With his beard and robust opinions, there's something of the Old Testament prophet about Aubrey de Grey. But the 47-year-old gerontologist (who studies the process of ageing) says his belief that he might live to the very ripe old age of 1,000...
Aug 2, 2010 View in Crawl 4
sciguyajAug 2, 2010
Even if you fix all the crap that's wrong with me and keep me from getting old there's one little flaw...I've been very lucky to survive for 30 years without getting myself killed, I really don't see myself making it for a 1,000 years without getting hit by a car, or pissing off the wrong guy, or something like that!
creationismlolAug 2, 2010
just live in your mom's basement, I've had no issues thus far!
csdcoAug 3, 2010
you live in his mom's basement? sweet.
thatebayerAug 3, 2010
Sue didnt tell me you were downstairs...
formerbabbyAug 3, 2010
Dugg for truth.
zackluyeAug 3, 2010
everybody's doing it!
osabr22000Aug 2, 2010
"On a long enough timeline, the survival scale for everyone drops to zero."
~John 3:16
thatebayerAug 3, 2010
This guy has been watching the twilight series too much.
xptoastAug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
bodiezAug 3, 2010
Twilight? Its from Fight Club.
bdfarielloAug 3, 2010
@ThatEbayer: That's not Twilight, you dolt.
@xptoast: I think the tilde covers that base. Maybe he has a bible on the same shelf as a certain Chuck Palahniuk novel.
h0dgesAug 2, 2010
On average a pedestrian gets hit by a car every 8 minutes.
( http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_chances_of_getting_hit_by_car )
(1000 years / 8 minutes) / world population = Odds of 1 in 100 of getting hit by car in a 100-year lifetime (assuming above statistic holds true throughout that period).
javaroxAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
skippydoorknobAug 2, 2010
What if you're an above average pedestrian?
hardeep1singhAug 3, 2010
You get above average hits.
alwilsonAug 2, 2010
Well, eventually you would have to change the stats to include flying cars and space craft... so that would surely skew the data negatively.
lostboyfoundAug 3, 2010
So on average a pedestrian gets hit by a car every 8 minutes but how man die?
hardeep1singhAug 3, 2010
how man die?
is that a new meme?
samoutAug 3, 2010
*y
Had to be nazi this time. "How man die?" sounds almost like "How is babby formed?"...
chaosprofessorAug 3, 2010
HIS SHOES FLEW OFF!!!!
--DANE COOK SUCKS
luvkitAug 2, 2010
Maybe stop being so much of an oblivious assh**e...
j4200Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
moloboloAug 3, 2010
http://overpopulationisamyth.com/
At least for now ...
Steven_RhodesApr 11, 2012
Thanks for that link.
http://rancho-cucamonga-new-homes.com
anothersoldierAug 4, 2010
we would just procastinate even more - "meh, i'll take the garbage out next year"
worldnickAug 23, 2010
Actually in developed countries the birth rate is dropping, combined with better distribution of our resources, city planning (building upwards) and expansion in to space I think we have pretty good prospects.
rhawk187Aug 2, 2010
One the bright side you might be able to live long enough until we can backup our consciousnesses, and implant them into freshly clones or robotic bodies if something happens to us.
Then the only problem is global catastrophic, so we'll have to put our off-site backups on Mars. Then we just have to keep colonizing further and further into the cosmos to make sure that our consciousnesses won't be lost in even catastrophes of galactic scale.
Eventually this universe will reach heat-death, but hopefully by then we'll have invented some sort of time-dialiation so that we can continue to operate in our little bubble of time while the universe outside ages slowly. Or just time travel so we can all pile backwards and avoid heat-death. Or more creatively, we just figure out how to make our own universes to escape into
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
Cool story pro.
chrysaliiAug 3, 2010
I think I'll just die.
momentAug 3, 2010
The day we back up our consciousness, we'll be able to live in the matrix.
protodonAug 2, 2010
SO your logic is let's not try because I can still die an accidental death? Okay well enjoy that.
addiktionAug 3, 2010
Time to automate travel then. I know some people will be hooked on driving cars manually but if you could get to any location by telling it your destination and you build the system well enough you could easily go 4 to 5 times faster than anything a car could go. You'd arrive in your destination in 10 minutes instead of an hour. Well worth it in my opinion. Much cheaper than airplane travel too. It has to be fail safe.
elbowgeekAug 3, 2010
I dunno, this guy managed to live for 2,000 years...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnLqLHWDg5E
magnesAug 3, 2010
The Man from Earth is much better.
mufasaAug 4, 2010
i LOVE that movie!
imkidredAug 3, 2010
You left out 'getting married' as another cause of death. No married man would live to 1,000 before killing himself.
mavedatthews85Aug 3, 2010
I think that kind of goes without saying...
drdoesdiggAug 3, 2010
in a world where people live for 1000 years, people do not get hit by cars.
parrappaAug 2, 2010
I know he answered it, but I'm not quite satisfied. If people lived until they were 1,000 the earth would have massive amounts of population problems. Living to 1,000 might not necessary be a good thing.
On the other hand, maybe having minds like Einstein and Newton alive could lift us off this rock and we could take some of us to another planet.
jedipiiAug 2, 2010
Imagine the technological progress possible if, instead of standing on the shoulders of giants, the giants themselves were able to continue in expanding the horizons of human knowledge.
How much further down the path would we be today if Galileo, Newton, or Einstein were still around, doing their best work today?
ai52487963Aug 3, 2010
If Aristotle lived for 1000 years, then we'd still be living in a geocentric world. Sometimes having a new perspective on things drives innovation...
jedipiiAug 3, 2010
He was a scientist... Once proven wrong, he'd have adapted to the new truth, as best as he was able.
kebwiAug 3, 2010
@ai52487963
No we wouldn't. That's ridiculous. Why do you think that just because Aristotle doesn't physically die that we as a society would never make any new scientific advances. Heck, the more likely scenario is that Artistotle himself would have changed his mind over time as new scientific discoveries proved his older theories wrong.
john1108Aug 3, 2010
@ai52487963
You have to understand people like Aristotle are men of reason. They are not arrogant in their beliefs. They have logic and reason behind why they believe what they believe, show him something he believes is false and he would have drawn up a completely new theory, as brilliant as the geocentric model was in his day.
jcimsAug 3, 2010
Portals aside, moving to a new planet would likely never be easier than fixing the one we're on.
Closed AccountAug 11, 2010
Ya know all those slave owners in the South during the civil war? They would still be around.
baphclassAug 2, 2010
"If people lived until they were 1,000 the earth would have massive amounts of population problems"
What if-- and bear with me for a second here-- people only had one or two kids for their entire life? Who says that person living in such an advanced era couldn't simply screen through the genetic material present in their prospective zygotes, and only use the ones with the least flaws? I mean, if people are already so genetically altered that they're living to 1,000, what possible harm can one small methodological addition bring?
If you've ever wanted to see an end to conditions like Down's Syndrome and Cystic Fibrosis, that's the way too go.
tarantulusAug 2, 2010
that will never happen as long as we live in a culture of ignorance... unfortunately ignorance breeds, literally.
njlee2010Aug 2, 2010
I agree with what you're saying but I just want to point out that Hitler had the same idea to create a master race. He began by sterilizing the disabled and people with incurable diseases but eventually moved on to flat out murdering people he deemed unfit to live. Hitler was not the only person who had these ideas. There were even doctors in the United States who performed sterilization procedures on various types of patients in the early 1900's.
I agree that if there were programs in place like this it would help put an end to various diseases and other disorders but there will never be laws in place which tell people who can or cannot have children.
If times were different, could you imagine being forbidden to have children because you carried a genetic defect that could be passed on to them. Life on Earth would be very different. There would be no love or relationships, only selective breeding for purpose of creating a master race. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
hyperianAug 3, 2010
Gattaca?
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
Hitler and Gattaca are both forceful, one outright malicious, and can't be compared to compassionate selection by the parents of their best PERSONAL (as in, not discriminatory eugenics because no one is forced not to breed) genetic material. And the message in Gattaca is flawed, as even sans genetic modification, a space program has every right, if not a moral obligation, to exclude someone with a heart problem.
labdiscoAug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
marrowmanAug 3, 2010
What happens to the poor Danny Devito Schmucks who are "the leftover crap"
;P
simplyfungusAug 3, 2010
Ender was a third child!
rchargelAug 3, 2010
@j0ltc0la
The Gattaca problem is not one of whether the space program should be selective. The problem lies in Capitalism. We would be creating a permanent under class of people who cannot afford genetic modification. Therefore, their children will suffer, and their children's children, and so on. Each successive generation would breed a permanent untermenschen.
jmobAug 2, 2010
i don't think so. Not everyone wants to live forever
ieatcatfoodAug 2, 2010
Then don't. I'd gladly live forever.
travelsonicAug 2, 2010
"Not everyone wants to live forever"
Someone else != me though, they should speak only for themselves and let those who want to go on the endeavor to live to 1,000 do so on their choosing.
Closed AccountAug 2, 2010
Unfortunately it seems the minds worth saving don't want to be saved, while the one's you wouldn't want to live forever are the one's that want to live forever and breed. Case in point, iEATcatFOOD above me...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
skillelAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
jmobAug 3, 2010
Who says I was talking about me?
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
Legalize euthanasia then. If you hit 700 years old and felt that you have experienced all you've ever wanted to, then die. Assuming you haven't already from disease/violence.
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
It's true. If you get bored of living, you can just blow your brains with a 12 gauge. But it's nice to have the option. Besides, 1,000 is not forever. It's 1,000.
rickthebrickAug 3, 2010
Why do humans have a fear of death? I believe we have a fear of death because if we did not we would not have any incentive to put any effort into our lives. Every thing we try to accomplish has already been accomplished many times. The purpose of life is nothing more than just something to do. If that is not right than why does not God gives us all the answers? We are always reincarnated to live again and when humans reach perfection we just reboot and start the search for perfection once again. So living to a 1,000 years does not accomplish much since everyone already does but we just start fresh again when we are reincarnated.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
@Skillel, I was joking. I mean seriously his name is iEATcatFOOD! take a joke guys...
webchimp32Aug 7, 2010
There can only be one.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091203/quotes?qt0337053
rolfAug 2, 2010
Have you seen the massive waste education is? 12 years of basic education of 8 years to research something? That's 20 years! Only to have 40 or so years to apply it?!
Longer life will be the best thing to happen to us? And divested of a short-running biological clock that gives us a short time to have kids, our birth rate will slow down. Hell, in all the European countries, it already has slowed down!
fcrowAug 2, 2010
It is important to colonize space, even if we won't live to be a 1000.
skalizarAug 2, 2010
We need to figure out practical near light speed travel (or better) first, before we start extending our lifespan. We will not adapt quickly enough to a tenfold increase in life span, we need to stop breeding now, and can't seem to do it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gtragnarokAug 2, 2010
We need to go to Mars and hopefully discover advanced technology of a long gone civilization......wait...
john1108Aug 3, 2010
"We need to figure out practical near light speed travel (or better) first, before we start extending our lifespan."
No, at near light speed, time dilates with respect to the rest of the world, but not to you. You still live to your normal life expectancy.
buckrogers1965Aug 2, 2010
Having "great" people live longer would actually hold science back and repress the following generations.
If Aristotle had lived a 1000 years we would all still be living in mud and stick huts.
"No matter who disagreed with them, even other philosophers, Aristotle's ideas - whether right or wrong - usually won out." - Issac Asimov.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
travelsonicAug 2, 2010
"If Aristotle had lived a 1000 years we would all still be living in mud and stick huts."
[citation needed]
mercedes383Aug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
rchargelAug 3, 2010
The problem is Aristotle himself. He was famous for accepting as truth, the mythologies of his time.
princednaAug 2, 2010
Well if you think about it, if we could live to be 1000, We could easily start settling the galaxy.
I mean sure the ships will take 1000 years or something to reach, BUT that's only 1 life time then right?
brucealmightyAug 2, 2010
And who wouldn't want to spend 1,000 years stuck inside a tin can out in the voids of space....?
supercouilleAug 3, 2010
Let's hope that the vessel used is not that much of a 'tin can' if you spend 1000 years inside it.
princednaAug 2, 2010
Call out a mission to go to the next Earth on a advanced star ship and lets see how many people line up. I'm sure it would stretch from coast to coast.
thanatosstAug 2, 2010
Bruce, paint it up to look like your mother's basement and diggers won't even notice that they're on a ship for at least 20 years.
skillelAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
kinggorillaAug 3, 2010
With travel that long I always thought we were going to have some form of hibernation or partial hibernation technology where crews would rotate shifts operating the spacecraft.
threeblackdotsAug 3, 2010
The easy answer is make a big spaceship...
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
1000 years in a spaceship that isn't VERY large is going to result in people going bat s**t crazy I think.
j4200Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
rotundoAug 3, 2010
See, whenever someone suggests that we filter people based on who is "best", then you immediately run into the problem of determining who is best. Have you seen any systems in our current world that have allowed us to consistently find the best people?
letterqAug 3, 2010
One word - Hitler. What a horrible idea to judge some as worthy of immortality, while others are doomed to death. Who gets the magic pill? People with the highest IQ? Scientists? Professional athletes? Entertainers? Artists? Politicians? The wealthy? (you know this one would happen one way or another). Horrible idea, and impossible to implement.
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
Impossible to implement my ass. Guess who is going to be getting this first when they develop it? All the rich assh**es, and its my bet they would block it from the general population.
skillelAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
protodonAug 2, 2010
I think a new mentality would arise if people started living that long. First off people would be wiser, I mean they would have 200, 300 years of life experience. Second, If I knew my reproductive capabilities and my ablity to care for other people would decrease as I got older, I'd want to have more kids earlier in life. But instead if I knew I had about 1000 years I'd probably hold off til I saw the universe. Also, and this might only go for the wisest of us, but who knows, if we realized we no longer had to replace people regularly in order to keep our species alive, we wouldn't be pumping out more kids like they were going out of style even though they might.
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
You overestimate stupid people.
stackeredAug 3, 2010
If we can stop ageing we can fix nutrient partitioning in our body (may be part of the process) and evolve people to require less and less energy therefore eliminating social problems associated with food allocations. Other resources, however, may be a problem. Doesn't matter this should be the main focus of mankind since it directly relieves and supports solving all our other problems. I think we are a foolish species to stop evolving ourselves (we can fly, we can communicate across the globe, etc), this is one of the ultimate goals of why we evolved brains IMO.
silfirielAug 3, 2010
some people have made incredible achievements in a life span of 70 years, just imagine what they could have done if they lived a 1000 years....
mtxrawkusAug 3, 2010
Some smart people end up doing bad things. Remember Einstein was part of the Manhattan Project.
Besides, would we really want a bunch of immortals running around being emo, a la Twilight?
parrappaAug 3, 2010
Einstein was a pacifist who greatly resented his work on the Manhattan project, but it was kill or be killed. He helped with the project so the United States wasn't blown up by the Nazi's atomic bomb.
zakatovAug 3, 2010
I nominate this post as the dumbest in the thread. Two sentences: one completely wrong and second just stupid.
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
funny how all the people that warn of population problems always refrain from volunteering to perish, but wouldn't mind your life to be cut short or ended all together ...
anothersoldierAug 4, 2010
even when you live past 60 you become very wise. but then you die and pass little on to the next generation. this is the problem with evolotion, and why it is so slow. If we lived until we were 1000, we would have everything figured out by the time we were 400 and we'd be populating other planets.
pietrosJan 11, 2011
Due to the exponential explosion of population, there is a person alive for each person that has been on earth in the last 2000 years (actually probably before). This means that you have minds like Newton or Einstein alive. Just not that famous yet.
macbookformeAug 2, 2010
Dugg for that Holly Grail ... for sure
ronin4740Aug 2, 2010
...or Holy... but if you want to dance with the druids in the Holly be my guest
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
This might not be as desirable as we like to think.
If I were Bill Gates, sure, living 1000 years would be awesome. But for most people, living that long would mean working a dead-end job for a 1000 years.
The real problem with long life is that you have to do it in this world.
ak666jkAug 3, 2010
Well, hey, retirement age is only like 65 in the US, right? So, that's like, 935 years of retirement checks!
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
@ak666jk, Sadly, by the time I retire, social security will likely be all gone.
eviljollyAug 3, 2010
I think life will change so much over the next few hundred years that won't be a problem. Who knows huge discovery we make next. AI, or even augmented intelligence would greatly accelerate our development, and we're talking exponential growth here. The average human can only keep about 7 "chunks" of information in their active memory. Imagine if you could do complex math calculations just the way a computer could, all because of either enhancements in genetics, or a microchip installed in your brain.
Over the next one or two thousand years, we won't even have jobs as we know them today. All of the crummy mind numbing jobs will be automated by machines, and we will have time to do what we really want with our lives. Art and science will become the most important jobs that require human intelligence.
The biggest problem right now is cost. Energy being one of the largest costs of all. Once we are able to move to the next generation of energy production, cost will drop dramatically. Hell, we can turn lead into gold, but the biggest problem is how much energy we use to do it. Imagine if we had a robot army building solar/hydro/geothermal infrastructure in desolate areas of the world though. Energy wouldn't even be an issue then. We already know that with just a small percentage of the Earth's total real estate we can completely cover our energy needs with solar alone.
Maybe I'm too optimistic though. After all, the robot army may just revolt and destroy us all ;)
dreamtigerAug 2, 2010
Aubrey is only 47 years old. I'd be interested to know if he still thinks the same way at 67. The quest for immortality is the ultimate in egotism. We should focus on cleaning up the planet, ending war, and making the best of the time we have, not living forever. The only thing this could possibly lead to is a bunch of extremely expensive techniques that stretch things out for a select group of billionaires. We'd have 300 year old vampire Dick Cheneys, and society would never progress.
Closed AccountAug 2, 2010
I fail to see how expanding the knowledge on how to prolong the human body's lifespan in any way prevents society from progressing. In fact, I'd say it's one of the single greatest things that would benefit society greatly. It is no coincidence that the countries whose population have the longest lifespans are also the most peaceful and happy. They also have the slowest population growth. Why is that? It's because they don't feel the need to start a family right away. On the other hand, if you live in a s**tty society where you know you'll likely be dead by the age of 45 or could be killed any minute, you'll want to hurry up and have kids (having kids is a part of living life for most people) as soon as possible so you can live out your life out and have a legacy to go on. Living longer changes that culture. Living longer means you have much more time to get a good education, accumulate wealth, and invest more in yourself overall.
gustomuchoAug 2, 2010
Ermm.. "It is no coincidence that the countries whose population have the longest lifespans are also the most peaceful and happy"
You have things mixed up, it is peaceful and happy country that produce the long life, not the other way around. If you live in a war zone, you have more chance to die at any age from bombing or gun shot than me getting hit by a car on a peaceful street.
Also evolution makes it that people need to criticize the elder, if you worked with your dad you know what I mean, the young always push the old. It is often hard for the old to change their ways, too much paradigm.
vincent21212Aug 2, 2010
Evolution is a good point. We must believe that we currently are the apex of consciousness to have the audacity to slow down the evolutionary process. I'd argue that we are not. The human species' brain has a way to go evolutionarily before it can unlock the deepest secrets of the Universe.
piieerrrreeAug 2, 2010
Living longer does not slow down the progress of evolution
j4200Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
knifesideleftAug 3, 2010
We have long passed the point of needing evolution to progress. We are at/reaching the point that with our own ingenuity can modify our own genetic makeup or create entirely new beings from scratch. We are at the apex of being our own gods.
(Sorry this was written terribly but I just got back from the bar and I'm doing the best I can)
jacanfieldAug 3, 2010
I think the capability to live to a 100 would has more risks than benefits. If you ask me, it seems extremely selfish for someone to live to 1000. The 1000 year old will be competing for resources that are meant for the next generations. The whole point of having one generation replace the next is it ensures genetic diversity and makes our species more resilient to changes to our environment. Since we are in the process of changing our environment faster that it has probably ever changed in human history, we need this genetic resiliency more than ever. We are supposed to die. The young are meant to replace the old. This is how life works.
rolfAug 2, 2010
I guess you would have been happier in neolithic times with a life expectancy under 30.
dromniAug 2, 2010
Will the vampire Dick Cheneys sparkle?
sarcasteakAug 2, 2010
lol as much as I hate twilight i can't believe anyone would digg you down.
staticfireAug 3, 2010
thank you for making my day
sucka27Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
protodonAug 2, 2010
At 67, he'd probably be even more motivated.
newms32Aug 3, 2010
Every year his prediction gets more extreme, probably around the time of his birthday. Hey, everyone handles aging differently. At 67 he'll be planning on seeing 5,000.
wheelingdude86Aug 3, 2010
Let see if you were alive for a year vs 85 what would you do different...
Hookers and blow consumption
rotundoAug 3, 2010
"The quest for immortality is the ultimate in egotism"
Yes it is, but that doesn't imply that it's a bad thing. A sense of self preservation is in fact the cornerstone of our survival as a species. All the things you say we should do (cleaning up the planet, ending war, etc) are not hindered by people living longer. In fact, it could very well be that those things could be better understood if mankind as a whole wasn't a creature with only a 70 year memory.
Look at it this way: do you think that there is any value in people being around at all? If so, then you must on some level believe that the majority of people are good (and generally this is supported by the evidence). So why is it suddenly a problem to make those good people last longer?
svnftAug 3, 2010
Just because his life goals don't align with yours doesn't mean he shouldn't be doing what he loves. The world's population does not have a to-do list that is 3 bullet points long. Let people live their 1000 year lives how they want to.
mattbdAug 3, 2010
Would you not have more of an incentive to keep the planet clean if you were going to be alive for longer?
matt2145Aug 2, 2010
Think about how much one person could learn If they could live to 1,000 considering our current theory that the mind has no limit to how much it can store. I wonder what the pay grade for someone with 10+ Doctorates would be hmmmm...
bstew22Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
simunsezAug 2, 2010
what about ex wives?
drdragunAug 2, 2010
Memory is strange. When learning any subject you can get 60-70% of the fundamental principles within a few weeks (and years of study and practice to gain the final 40%), and that's all you get to keep after about 5-10 years if you don't practice routinely on a specific subject. The mind is like the body, and will adapt to exercise and atrophy in neglect.
I wonder if someone who lived to be 1000 would even remember who they were at age 25, other than reconstructing it from basic photos and a few rare significant memories.
rolfAug 2, 2010
I don't accept that theory. Unlimited storage would require unlimited space. Last time I check, my head was quite a finite area. My guess is that the mind regularly scraps things we don't access much. I don't remember many places in my early childhood, details of the first home I lived in as a kid are fading, and the Spanish I took in high school has disappeared (not that I paid the greatest attention).
feignnuAug 2, 2010
I think you're taking the analogy to computer storage too literally. There are no physical bits in the brain because memories are stored as pathways, ie connections between neurons. Sure, we have a finite number of neurons (granted, it's in the trillions), but the possible connections between those neurons is greater than the number of fundamental particles in the universe.
j4200Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
knifesideleftAug 3, 2010
I'm assuming that at 1000 years old your brain would be unable to form too many new connection without some sort of cybernetic implant to help which may well exist in the year 3000. However if this doesn't happen and its true that we are only our memories then the person you are today may no longer even exist by then in any form.
yacksAug 3, 2010
My brain works almost like Kelly Bundy's.. each time I learn something new, i forget something else..
bukowskyAug 2, 2010
Am I the only one that doesn't really want to live to be 1,000?
tyg10Aug 2, 2010
Nope, you're not the only one.
khyberkitsuneAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
nexuspAug 2, 2010
You could always explore the planet. Live in a different country for 10 - 20 years at a time.
wolfcasterAug 2, 2010
No, there are lots of suicidal people, i'm sure none of them want to live to be 1,000.
rolfAug 2, 2010
Let's ask how you feel on your deathbed. When I was a little brat, I said I didn't want to live past 20 and get old. Guess what, I over 20 now and I'm not ready to go.
frumblerAug 3, 2010
Who can blame you, you are at your prime. Let's see how you feel at 80.
rinoteAug 2, 2010
Depends on your quality of life. More importantly, who is living that life with you. I'd rather die with my friends than live alone for another 900 + years.
dullnationAug 2, 2010
So... you'll never make any new friends? Even if you don't live that long?
travelsonicAug 2, 2010
That begs the question of whether or not that is how it would be. I for one have no problems meeting people, being with people, making bonds and friends, and hope that continues as long as I am alive.
megadeth222Aug 2, 2010
That's a good point, but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
bartledooAug 3, 2010
@Megadeth222 Was that supposed to be a coherent sentence?
danielvutran1Aug 3, 2010
Megadeth was trying to be funny by using an old meme! Hahahaha!
sucka27Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
mikimacAug 2, 2010
I can already see a 700 years mortgage plan, 40 years presidential terms, but the worst is wife nagging for 900 years.
So no thank you.
andreirAug 3, 2010
So why you don't want to live to be 1000? Does your life sucks so much that you feel like you would not be able to enjoy it for the next 1000 years? And when are you planning to die? What is that magic number? Average lifespan in the Middle Ages was 30 years. Do you want to live to be 50 or it's too much?
fr1234Aug 3, 2010
I am well up for living to 1000
silfirielAug 3, 2010
screw the 1000, I want FOREVER!!! MUHAHAHAHA
professorsymAug 3, 2010
No, but then you knew that before you asked the question.
loonyphoenixAug 3, 2010
No, evidently there's at least 62 other people like you. Well, no one's forcing you. Enjoy your ageing!
doctechnicalAug 2, 2010
The good news is you can live to be 1,000 years old. The bad news is that it requires the brain stems of 100 young people :)
suspectedAug 2, 2010
How is that bad news?
mikefromamericaAug 3, 2010
10x lifespan means 10x population. You think unemployment and poverty are bad now? Enjoy living on a planet with 60 billion people.
fr0stbyte124Aug 2, 2010
That's not so bad. We can just grow them on people farms. s**t will be cash.
hydesAug 2, 2010
it worked for the machines in the matrix
thegreenspanputAug 3, 2010
and plus, Social Security would probably go BK
iamsmoothAug 2, 2010
Bender: Dying sucks butt. How do you living beings cope with mortality?
Leela: Violent outbursts.
Amy: General slutiness.
Fry: Thanks to denial, I'm immortal.
naz2292Aug 3, 2010
Came here for this.
Was not disappointed.
gryffon5147Aug 3, 2010
Best episode yet.
jordanlgtaAug 3, 2010
Futurama is overrated. Yeah, I said it.
dephextwinAug 3, 2010
Prepare to be appropriately rated.
jordanlgtaAug 3, 2010
Oh I know DephexTwin. I like to think of it as how many idiots I can find that think Futurama is a great show. Watch the number get bigger and bigger.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sprucecabooseAug 3, 2010
PROTIP: Someone liking different entertainment than you do does not make them an idiot. Unless, of course, you are an arrogant jerk.
tommyrAug 2, 2010
Have you seen 100 year olds? I'll pass on the 1,000 part. If I make 70 I'll be happy.
fr0stbyte124Aug 2, 2010
The idea is that you won't be affected by the damages of aging nearly as fast. So at the age of 100 you'll still look and feel like you're in your 30's.
strecherAug 3, 2010
"Look" and "Feel" are never on the same page. Ask anyone.
kakekAug 3, 2010
@strecher did you even read the article?
sucka27Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
tommyrAug 2, 2010
Not in our lifetime.
sucka27Aug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
cyclonusripAug 2, 2010
The stuff he's talking about basically means you won't age. The frailty of old age is a symptom of the problems he's working on. Basically the 1000 number is just because the interviewer asked if he thinks it's possible he'll live to 1000. I think on some video or article a read basically the 1000 number that a lot of gerontologists talk about is based on the likelihood of you do die in some kind of accident. So basically on average people would live to 1000. You could theoretically live forever if you never encountered an accident. At that point life span won't really have any meaning since the chance of you dieing tomorrow would be exactly the same throughout your entire adult life.
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
I can see other problems as well though. Teeth for example. I wonder how many would still have them at 500 years old.
mattbdAug 3, 2010
Actually there's already been some success in growing new teeth using stem cell therapy, so that's unlikely to be an issue.
bimtottAug 2, 2010
http://www.theonion.com/articles/millions-of-americans-succumbing-to-sudden-elder-d,1890/
downthesunAug 2, 2010
Great idea, as if the world wasn't already over populated.
wolfcasterAug 2, 2010
I wouldn't say the world is over populated, it's just undertechnologized.
thirstykoalaAug 2, 2010
And you would be wrong.
gtragnarokAug 2, 2010
Maybe if it wasn't for that global disease that held back humanity for hundreds of years.
magnesAug 3, 2010
Even if we could live to 1000 years most would probably die of cancer in less than 200 years.
marshalbananaAug 9, 2010
RTFA.
fcrowAug 2, 2010
♪♫ Who wants to live forever! ♫♪
digg2point0Aug 2, 2010
ONE LOVE MUST DIII~IIIE!!!!!
Closed AccountAug 2, 2010
Who waits forever anyway?
kakekAug 3, 2010
♪♫ Forever young! ♫♪
jonprojectAug 3, 2010
There can be only one!
ivanmarshAug 2, 2010
Feed on the blood of virgins?
rendonsmugAug 2, 2010
Digg could start up a killer business.
silfirielAug 3, 2010
that doesn't work....
magnesAug 3, 2010
And you know how?
ryanwbAug 2, 2010
Dude...
The joints, eye sight, hearing.... they all start to give out. I don't see see a way to curb the demise of those parts of the body. Knees especially start to wear out, once the cartilage is gone, it's goneComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
factorof13Aug 2, 2010
Stem cells.
ieatcatfoodAug 2, 2010
SCIENCE
bjenkinsAug 2, 2010
I hear the jury is still out on Science.
oxygnAug 2, 2010
Just read an article recently about live cartilage transplants... not saying it can be done now, but probably will in the future.
mweatherAug 2, 2010
Two words: Robot legs.
kebwiAug 3, 2010
Um, two more words: robot everything. Seriously. I can't believe more people don't consider that a viable prediction.
ravediggerAug 3, 2010
Robot legs would help you dance to techno music at raves.
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
Two words: Cyborg!!! ... bitch.
larkstewAug 3, 2010
Here's a Ted talk by Aimee Mullins about her prosthetic legs. I think it s this talk where she says other women are jealous because she can decide how tall she wants to be, which makes her consider her legs an asset and not a disability:
http://www.ted.com/talks/aimee_mullins_prosthetic_aesthetics.html
buzamanAug 2, 2010
Every time some says "I don't see a way" there's a person somewhere working to get an answer.
jacareAug 2, 2010
if you actually read into what this guy is talking about, he essentially says that most of those problems are the result of aging. in that normally the body repairs or stops the cell damage that builds up over time that causes those problems. but once you start to get old the body stops fixing the cell damage and it builds up and you get sick and die/fall apart. what hes trying to do is stop, prevent or postpone the body from switching over to this metabolic state, thus drastically increasing life expectancy. this is all of course moot if you walk in front of a bus.
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
You'll be shopping for body parts just like you shop for car parts today. They should also come in standard sizes.
In Australia they changed the genetic makeup of a pig, allowing transplants between pig and human with extremely low rejection list.
BYW, did you hear about the first penis transplant? It was a partial success. The patient's hands rejected the organ.
ieatcatfoodAug 2, 2010
Aww this is cool! I studied a bit about hydras (an immortal sea species that never ages) and I totally believe that we could expand our telomeres so we wouldn't age
f**k year GO AUBREY
propethicAug 3, 2010
There are also species of turtles who do not age, not strictly for invertebrates or asexual creatures
wilxtrgAug 2, 2010
His TED talk from 2005 explains his ideas far better.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_aging.html
furburgerhelperAug 2, 2010
This needs to happen. It's the only way we'll be able to successfully invade other galaxies.
wheelingdude86Aug 3, 2010
You've got my vote if you ever run for supreme galactic commander.
sleapAug 2, 2010
So, does this mean that I get to be a kid for 100 years, or do I just live to 80 and then spend 900+ years s**tting myself and growing a garden of tumors all over my body.
esteskidAug 2, 2010
neither, i think...
nullcodesAug 2, 2010
I am pretty sure, like everything else, it will depend on how much money you have. Which options you can afford.
newerakbAug 3, 2010
Don't worry! Instead of working for 35 years then retiring, you get to work for 850 years instead! What progress we've made!
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
What, you're expecting to live off the labor of society for 900 years?
tntbassAug 3, 2010
Think how great of a doctor one can be if they have 800 years of experience.
Also, on the opposite end, think how s**tty it would be to be in a quickly evolving career such as computers. You're programming skills are only good for 5-20 years before you have to learn something new. Hardware knowledge? Useless after a few years.
It's a challenge all IT guys face, but could you imagine facing it for 800 years straight? I'd rather get into an easier career, such as being a doctor.
newerakbAug 3, 2010
@TnT
If no one's getting sick, we won't need great doctors anymore :)
Just trauma surgeons.
tntbassAug 3, 2010
@newerakb
People would still get sick, they just wouldn't age, or you wouldn't get age related diseases. There are still plenty of non age related diseases to cure.
tntbassAug 3, 2010
More important question:
If you're 300 years old (you'd look 25-30 years old) is it still acceptable to f**k an 18 year old?
niccoswAug 2, 2010
Aubrey better get good with a broadsword because...THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!
iamnobody8614Aug 3, 2010
HERE WE ARE, BORN TO BE KING
mercedes383Aug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
Wasn't it an ancient Katana?
makushimirianAug 3, 2010
I think it was a broadsword when he was in Scotland, then he took Sean Connery's katana when he got killed by the bad dude (Kurgen? ... something like that) and then uses it when he's in America.
sirdrizzzleAug 3, 2010
This was the first thing that popped into my head. im changing my name to Connor.
wolfcasterAug 2, 2010
I don't like how Aubrey de Grey always talks about living to be 1,000. It seems like such an arbitrary number. I think immortality makes more sense. This is easily achievable with digitizing the mind. That way we could be immortal and roam the digital world, like living in the matrix. Or, we could just download into a really good robot body, like, way better than our lame bio- illogical bodies. HAHA, best pun ever :(Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
piieerrrreeAug 2, 2010
http://digg.com/general_sciences/How_to_Live_to_1_000?t=34133233#c34133947
frostekAug 3, 2010
You mean our digital *copies* would get to do all the cool stuff. We would still be here in the analogue world and still die.
gordon2108Aug 3, 2010
And just imagine if there was an afterlife and you had to look down at that assh**e digital copy doing everything you wanted to do.
langfordAug 2, 2010
I guess I'd better find a job that I really really like.
brucealmightyAug 2, 2010
Or you could always live with your folks for the first 500 years or so.....
piieerrrreeAug 2, 2010
Or you could always find new work, retraining whenever necessary. There's no rush against the clock :P
gtragnarokAug 2, 2010
Try to make do and put as much as you can into savings. Eventually, the returns will be enough to live a work-free life.
langfordAug 2, 2010
Unless everyone is doing it. Then the saving will be necessary just to get by while working.
skillelAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
rhydebleAug 3, 2010
You do understand that inflation is usually a bit higher then the returns on savings right?
magnesAug 3, 2010
Actually it's usually a little less. Many people live that way already.
And to Skillel - read about that wonderful word: hobby.
protodonAug 2, 2010
Or pay off your mortgage, live within your means and travel travel travel.
yunusAug 3, 2010
Find a job that has a good pension. Military for example, 20 years then half basic pay for life. That would really add up.
magnesAug 3, 2010
Yeah, going into military is a great idea if you want to live 1000 years.
yunusAug 3, 2010
You should look into military death stats. They are surprisingly low. Statistically you are safer in Iraq as a member of the US military than you are as a civilian in Detroit.
spookyttwsAug 2, 2010
I really don't want to live past 70. I've had to take care of all of my grandparents, after 80, your not really living, you're just kind of surviving. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gauthicAug 2, 2010
The same could be said for 20, if you're cynical enough.
esteskidAug 2, 2010
we're constantly trying to postpone death, at all ages
osabr22000Aug 2, 2010
............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................\,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kebwiAug 3, 2010
I can't believe how few of the people writing these comments seem to have the vaguest understanding of what Aubrey is advocating. How can you be so stupid as to believe that his notion of immortality is some sort of geriatric zombie apocalypse. You really really don't get it.
yacksAug 3, 2010
after 80.. unless you are Jack LaLanne
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
Maybe I should invest in Pfizer. The demand for Viagra, may go through the roof.
mattbdAug 3, 2010
The idea kind of includes defeating things like dementia - no one wants to keep people with dementia alive for hundreds of years.
danbarkerAug 2, 2010
I think this may be crossing the line really. We have too many people all ready and this wont help at all!
kebwiAug 3, 2010
The solution to overpopulation is not extermination (i.e., forcing or otherwise ensuring that people die). It's at the other end of the process where overpopulation must be tackled.
sucka27Aug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
osabr22000Aug 2, 2010
So you're telling me he remembers to bring the beer but leaves the sanity at home?
wheelingdude86Aug 3, 2010
Rhino's can run 32mph
mattbdAug 3, 2010
Yeah, I suspect his own immortality regime involves pickling himself with alcohol. Seriously, I saw him on a documentary once and he was drinking a pint at half past nine in the morning. But then he does look like a real ale type.
donotclickjimAug 2, 2010
FTA: "It's conceivable that people in my age bracket, their 40s, are young enough to benefit from these therapies."
What are these "therapies" you speak of Aubrey? Gene therapy? Is this stuff already being experimented on people?
WHY does the article not explain!!!
piieerrrreeAug 2, 2010
Because it's the Guardian
http://digg.com/general_sciences/How_to_Live_to_1_000?t=34133390#c34133390
wontonforevuhAug 2, 2010
No relationship to Gandalf the Grey?
gianthorseAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
magnesAug 3, 2010
His name is Saru... Saruman or something?
rodalliAug 3, 2010
Aubrey is also known as Radagast the Brown
osabr22000Aug 2, 2010
So, let me get this straight. We have a computer scientist (programmer) telling us how to slow down our aging process rather than an MD or some else closely related to the study of the body's processes?
I think then, the next time something goes wrong with my car, I'll just drive up to my church so we can all pray the problem away.
If this is the type of nonsense that will permeate our society, then I don't want to live to 100.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thenikAug 2, 2010
Don't you think the organization he founded, which I assume has plenty of medical doctors available for research, would have that covered? And could he have not gotten further education in this topic since he originally went to school?
esteskidAug 2, 2010
Please don't compare the study of two subjects to praying away problems. You're doing a disservice to everyone.
Also in case you care why this guy might actually know what he's talking about:
After graduation in 1985, de Grey joined Sinclair Research Ltd as an AI/software engineer. In 1986, he co-founded Man-Made Minions Ltd to pursue the development of an automated formal program verifier. He met his wife, fruit-fly geneticist Adelaide Carpenter, at a graduate party in Cambridge, and through her was introduced to the science of anti-ageing, when her boss needed someone who knew about computers and biology to take over the running of a database on fruit flies.[7] From 1992 until 2006, he was in charge of software development at the university's Genetics Department for the FlyBase genetic database.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey#Early_life_and_education
osabr22000Aug 2, 2010
Yes, but you see he wasn't educated in gerontology. That's key. Professionals generally DO what they are EDUCATED in. Until he receives some type of degree, it's a hobby. While you are correct, I may have used a relatively weak and charged metaphor. You do a disservice to yourself and anyone who hears your opinion when you place as much weight on a hobbyists word as you do a professionals.
/realitycheck.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
skillelAug 2, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
osabr22000Aug 3, 2010
Did I say you were a hobbyist? Maybe a liar. I doubt at age 23 you have achieved such things. If you have, congrats.
grantmoore3dAug 2, 2010
Why not be a little more realistic and aim for everyone to live to 120 while maintaining their youthfulness longer?
skalizarAug 2, 2010
Probably because it won't work that way. Once we figure out how to turn off the aging switch, who's gonna want to turn it back on? Age extension will probably grow exponentially as we figure out how all of the processes work.
feignnuAug 3, 2010
you miss the man's point, grantmoore3d. He wants to shoot for maintaining people's youthfulness to 1000. Now, does this mean he thinks we will invent an anti-aging technology in the next decade or two that will extend our lives to 1000? No. It means we will start developing life extending therapies, some of which will extend people's lives and youthfulness long enough that even newer and better therapies can be developed, which can extend their lives further, and so on. You should watch his TED talk. He explains everything really well there.
yveskleinAug 2, 2010
...and he's dead.
jzh1554Aug 3, 2010
All I can think of when I read that is the south park quote... "Aaaaand it's gone"
suganindiaAug 2, 2010
dying to live forever ??????
No , stop reading this crap , you'll just live till death !
lokithecomplexAug 2, 2010
The image you're thinking of is Rip Van Winkle.
zook024Aug 2, 2010
Your mind may want to live to be 1,000, but your body does not.
travelsonicAug 2, 2010
But if you actually RTFA, science is providing ways to slow down the aging process exponentially.
zook024Aug 3, 2010
hence why I said the body does not want to live for 1,000 years. Science is altering the body, it is not the body's it's natural life course if science is providing ways to slow down the aging process exponentially.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
danielvutran1Aug 3, 2010
LOL. Ever heard of medicine?
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
And my body wants to shove my face full of fatty, sugary foods because it thinks famine lurks around every corner. Just because something is 'natural' doesn't mean it is a good idea.
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
As long as you can keep the brain from aging, you can transplant the brain on another body. I've seen that a neurosurgeon in OH is quite successful in transplanting monkeys' heads from one animal to another and he thinks it can be easily implemented to humans.
faithclubdotnetAug 2, 2010
The cool thing about knowing God is real is that you know after death, you not only get to live forever, but there is no suffering either... I'm so glad God let me know he is real, Jesus is LORD. I get to work on making the world a better place without worrying that my best experiences happen before I die. I have no bucket list aside from telling others that Jesus is real, and helping people out. Jesus did self sacrifice and its a precedent for us to also live our lives to give of ourselves to those in need.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mattbenfieldAug 2, 2010
Can't tell...if...trolling...must resist...urge to...refute...
faithclubdotnetAug 3, 2010
I tell you the truth. I know God exists for a fact! I've been telling everyone on Digg for years. Jesus is LORD!
We're called to tell it across the world in the Bible by God.
peterfileAug 2, 2010
Right, what's that got to do with this?
faithclubdotnetAug 3, 2010
The desire to live a long time is satisfied in Jesus. We get to live for Eternity, and Heavenly moments are greater than anything we can experience in worldly moments. It is life Eternal, and SUPER AWESOME life at the same time. We get to chill with God, and have unlimited universes to explore.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ilovemayonaiseAug 3, 2010
What about people in remote locations that haven't heard the word of your god simply because of isolation? Do they all go to hell? Loving god indeed.
Take it easy troll-boy!
faithclubdotnetAug 3, 2010
I don't think its up to you to judge other people's destiny. God is the only one who judges.
bertthesnurtAug 3, 2010
it not up to you to judge ours , we cam be atheist if we want to
lju1492Aug 3, 2010
@bertthesnurt
Would you warn someone that they were walking backwards towards the edge of a cliff ? Or would you say, we'll it's their life, so long as they aren't hurting anyone.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jackoftherealmAug 2, 2010
High fives all around for that beard
cloudberriesAug 2, 2010
You just know he wants to live to 1000 just so he could see how long it would grow.
bartledooAug 3, 2010
Hair does not grow indefinitely the same way fingernails do. The hair on your head falls out and regrows every few years as part of its natural cycle. Other parts of the body have shorter cycles.
cloudberriesAug 3, 2010
Well, that's no goddamn fun now, is it?
nullcodesAug 2, 2010
I think we should put resources and funding with the aim for people to have "reasonable quality of life" at age 100. That means that a person of age 99 can be healthy enough to be enough to drive and get their own groceries and even work at a job (if they wanted to). That is a median person should expect that they can do at 100 what a typical 72 year old can do today. Also, the median person should live to at least 120.
I don't think those goals are unreasonable.
tokeliAug 2, 2010
Yeah that'd be f**king wonderful. Imagine if everyone who died of old age every year didn't die? Imagine the f**king staggering population boom. The planet would be stripped bare within 10 years.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rhawk187Aug 2, 2010
And we'd have more of a motivation to colonize other planets. Quit being afraid of progress, technology, and advancement.
mshipAug 3, 2010
Im sure we would just have more wars to reduce the population. Then we will probably develop this stuff called Solent Green. You do know what Solent Green is right....?
tokeliAug 3, 2010
I'd be first in line on a mission to colonize another planet. But humanity needs to stop popping out babies like they're f**king candy before we start trying to defeat old age. Because we'd be f**ked long before anyone gets off their asses and start the decades-long research for a large colony on another planet.
rockynAug 3, 2010
soylent*
zerocubedAug 2, 2010
Only sure way to live for longer than the normal human life span is to go cyborg.
buzamanAug 2, 2010
This and a space ship and I'm golden!
brainflakesAug 2, 2010
All you have to do is lengthen your telomeres without getting cancer, so simple even a lobster can do it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobster#Longevity
stochioAug 2, 2010
The social security age might need to be adjusted.
protodonAug 2, 2010
What social security? I won't even see that s**t.
craigreedAug 3, 2010
yeah you will, we'll just hike the taxes on our grandkids so that they can pay for our lack of breeding, we could also have some sort of lax workers age immigration bill to get revenues high enough to pay for our sorry asses to retire.
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
Shhhhh. Don't tell them.
garmonbozziaAug 2, 2010
Yoda didn't even make it to 1,000. No one outlives Yoda, not even Chuck Norris.
alwilsonAug 2, 2010
Don't be so sure about that... Chuck is still alive.
danielvutran1Aug 3, 2010
So far.. Chuck Norris has never died.
Closed AccountAug 3, 2010
Nibbler did.
magnesAug 3, 2010
Even the Doctor doesn't have 1000 yet.
pahomiAug 2, 2010
This guy is my hope for salvation. He is my Jesus! He may not look like much but it's better than the complete certainty that i will cease to exist in a few years time...that s**t's scary
alwilsonAug 2, 2010
Don't be afraid of death. After all, you've experienced the "feeling" of death before. Close your eyes and think back to how you felt BEFORE you were born. Yeah... death is like that. A whole lot of nothing.
"I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it." ~ Mark Twain
hornyangelAug 3, 2010
It means nothing, absolutely nothing. As long as people have a chance to die in crashes (car, plane), earthquakes, floods, wars, famine, these advances mean nothing.
cloudberriesAug 2, 2010
*insert really witty comment about how I'd much rather live 10 years as something awesome than 1000 years as something that's not awesome. Or something similar*
trolleyfanAug 2, 2010
Step one: Live to 999
Step two: Don't die the following year...
magnesAug 3, 2010
If you put in in iteration it sounds quite simple: just "don't die the following year" for the next 900-999 years (depends on your age now).
invictus125Aug 3, 2010
"Watch that first step, it's a doosie..."
sb66Aug 2, 2010
The human body is a machine, and when we understand it fully we'll be able to "fix" aging.
incognito2008Aug 2, 2010
I will take anyone's spot in line to live forever. When faced with your very last breath and s**tting on yourself I think people would jump at the chance to live to 1000.
gregoryanAug 3, 2010
you can have mine.
i'm right behind bill o'reilly, and a couple of spots ahead of sean hannity
alwilsonAug 2, 2010
Live long and prosper.
vanilla3fiveAug 3, 2010
raunchy vagina for president
shanemcdeathAug 2, 2010
"And when people have made their peace with this ghastly thing that is going to happen to them at some time in the distant future, they tend to be rather reluctant to re-engage the question when someone comes along with a new idea."
99% of the pro aging arguments you hear, including the ones in this comment section, stem from this fact. It's denial, basically.
rhydebleAug 3, 2010
Have you ever thought about the fact that if everyone lives to a thousand years old, around 99.9% of people will be screaming "GET OF MA LAWN"?
How about societal advancements? It is already a lot harder for older people to get the hang of something like the internet. If a humongous part of humanity is born long before the rise of a new technology, it will probably never catch on. Just think of all those people who insisted that rock&roll/television/computergames/theinternet are evil. The fact that these people die means that society as a whole can move on, while immortality can lead to extreme stagnation.
That is apart from the fact that new technology such as anti-aging will be expensive, and at first will only be available to the rich, leading to an even greater gap between the rich and the poor.
shanemcdeathAug 3, 2010
you're right, all that does outweigh eternal oblivion for you and everyone you will ever care about. Now what was it i was saying about denial again.....
protodonAug 2, 2010
I love when people say, why would I want to live forever and watch everyone die around me? Like everyone is in a movie where they are the main character. In real life wouldn't your friends and family have the option to live forever too?! Duh!
Also, I think many people are opposed to life extension or living forever because aging is a universal thing. People thing it's impossible to overcome and unnatural to do so. If every single person on earth died of the common cold when they were 25 I bet we would never have the cure for it because it would just be accepted as inevitable.
magnesAug 3, 2010
There was an episode of Stargate about this. Or maybe even two. And one in Star Trek probably too.
hydesAug 2, 2010
Come on you apes. You want to live forever!
/starship troopers
frostbytAug 3, 2010
I would like to not die on the battlefield.
hydesAug 3, 2010
sign your 1248, you get your gear, and you take a stroll down washout lane. Do you get me?