Let's have a serious discussion about immortality

[Anonymous No.9123953]

based on facts...

In all honesty, do you think people born in the 80s have a good chance of becoming the first immortals?

How far are we from attaining biological immortality?

[Anonymous No.9123969]

Most people largely overestimate how much will they live. The inevitability of death is something you need to accept.

[Anonymous No.9123971]

>>9123969
>. The inevitability of death is something you need to accept.
Lol, no. What a stupid thing to tell someone.

[Anonymous No.9123972]

>>9123953
>How far are we from attaining biological immortality?

By solving the Riemann hypothesis.

[Anonymous No.9123975]

>>9123971
What new research on the medical/scientific field wilñ actually make you immortal? Increasing life expectancy just like that doesn't make you immortal and invulnerable.

[Anonymous No.9123995]

>>9123971

You are going to die. Maybe sooner than you think.

Deal with it autismo.

[Anonymous No.9124008]

>>9123975
Increased life expectancy gives more leeway in waiting for further breakthroughs. It's at least some comfort.

As for where we might actually see immortality happen, gene therapy seems most promising. The aging process is built into our genes, and though we don't know the consequences of trying to fuck with it, we're only now starting to even be able to imagine what we can do with it. And gene research is greatly assisted by computing power, so we can expect our understanding of the field to follow an exponential growth curve.

[Anonymous No.9124012]

>>9124008
this
You can't really say more.
Maybe we'll see it in our life times, maybe we wont. I wouldn't be surprised either way with our exponential technological advancements.

[Anonymous No.9124063]

>>9123971
fucking lol

THERE IS A 100% CHANCE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DIE AT SOME POINT, DESPITE THE MOST OPTIMISTIC TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES

entropy's a bitch

[Anonymous No.9124069]

>>9124008
How does gene therapy prevent you from being incinerated alive or be shot down by Tyrone? You still don't understand just how inevitable death is in the long run.
>>9124012
There is nothing in the realm of science promising you that tomorrow you will not die in some retarded way. It's dogmatic and pure belief if you think science will "save" you.

[Anonymous No.9124071]

>>9123953
Uploading your "consciousness" into a computer might be possible some day. But note that an upload is basically a copy, so there is no guarantee that the upload will actually be you, it might be a different consciousness that is identical to you. You might still die and your consciousness fades away. To make sure that consciousness in the hard drive is actually you, you would need a transfer of your consciousness, not a copy. I don't see how that would be possible though.

[Anonymous No.9124077]

Never. If you're that kind of faggot who puts all his hope in science and technology to avoid him from dying because he smokes a lot and does drugs, you're a disgusting human being.

[Anonymous No.9124079]

>>9124008
>>9124012
>exponential technological advancement
alright, this meme really needs to fucking die

[Anonymous No.9124081]

very low probability but it's possible. Biology is just incredibly complex though. Also the technological level to do so also brings in a lot of other challenges that might kill us.

[Anonymous No.9124132]

>>9123953
>Be immortal
>Memory isn't infinite
>Can't remember childhood
>No idea when you were even born or what sort of life you've lived throughout eternity
>How many times have you moved, changed your name, changed careers
>Maybe you've taken up a hobby or area of study and you're really into it, but is it the first time you've been really into this thing? If not then what meaning does it have getting into it now if a few centuries from now you won't even remember.

[Anonymous No.9124161]

Even if we could somehow freeze the aging process, people would still get cancer eventually and cancer is a long way off from being cured.

We're all going to die, anon.

[Anonymous No.9124164]

>>9124069
>How does gene therapy prevent you from being incinerated alive or be shot down by Tyrone? You still don't understand just how inevitable death is in the long run.
OP said biological immortality, which means eternal life assuming nothing kills you.

[Anonymous No.9124169]

>>9123995

[Anonymous No.9124192]

>>9124132
BuT whAt iF tHAt'S aLreAdy ThE caSe ?????

[Anonymous No.9124210]

>>9123953
I don't think immortality will be achieved within our lifetimes.
There are ethical concerns with genetics research that prevent people from embracing it fully.
CRISPR cannot edit the full human genome, and it tends to make errors, so for now the technology to make a living human immortal does not exist.
People would probably not be comfortable with gene editing embryos, and if they were we're not there yet.
We don't have the understanding of consciousness needed to transfer it to a machine.
TLDR
No.

[Anonymous No.9124222]

>>9123953
Yes, I do think people born in the 2080's have a good chance of becoming the first immortals.

[Anonymous No.9124226]

>>9124071
That's bullshit and always has been.

Consciousness is barely worth more than your personal schedule, your signature, your passport.
It's surface level.
Where do you think dreams come from? Not from your decisions.
Where do desires come from? Not from memories.

Genetics is the only key to selfhood.

[Anonymous No.9124234]

>>9124063
>Proceeds to post a dozen Mitsubishi Keikau videos about how we're all going to activate a interuniversal wormhole using planck energy to boil spacetime.
I think most people's fear of death is FOMO though. There's a difference between dying at the end of time and dying in 1900 for example.


>Genetics is the only key to selfhood.
This thread is already shitty enough, don't start.

[Anonymous No.9124252]

>>9124234
>using planck energy to boil spacetime
LOL, not even two black holes colliding produces any wormholes

[Anonymous No.9124254]

>attach brain to robotic body
>wait for synthetic brain tissue to be made
>start making neural mappings to it
>gradually remove original tissue
>????
>live forever

wow, that was hard you mortalets

[Anonymous No.9124258]

>>9124132
>write a book
>nullify every other argument

[Anonymous No.9124264]

>>9124254
People who say immortality is impossible mean on a cosmological scale because our current theorized ultimate fate is heat death and the only way to avoid it would be to disprove one of our laws of physics.

These people don't mean 1000 year old humans, they mean humans of actual infinite age.

>>9124252
I didn't say its sensible, just that Keku as actually said that's how people could escape.

[Anonymous No.9124266]

>>9124264
the issue then is to make ourselves out of a system that has an entropy change of 0 forever while still being sapient.

[Anonymous No.9124269]

>>9124266
Which again, requires something currently physically impossible.

Now hey, maybe just the change we need does come along 30 million years in the future, who knows, but we can't speculate what is possible on technology we don't even have the precursor of the precursor to yet. For all practical purposes, immortality is impossible by human means; you're going to have to get into unscientific mysticism to support it as of now.

Maybe the cyborgs of 1382017AD will laugh at our naive pessimism.

[Anonymous No.9124273]

>>9124269
ok how about this. instead of entropy change being zero, it's rate of increase gets exponentially slower but never zero. that way, it's not converging and violating the second law, but doesn't cause decay in order that would be visible to the system due to the timescales involved. i guess infinity though isn't valid here as a timescale and it would decay, but if it converges at an arbitrarily far away distance, isn't that the same as saying it doesn't converge in some sense?

[Anonymous No.9124276]

>>9124273
Again, modern science can't answer this question in the way you'd like. We may be able to get biological immortality in a few decades, and that'll get you far enough to start asking about entropy reversal, maybe. I believe the average lifespan for a biologically immortal person, assuming all other risk factors remain the same, is around 8 thousand years statistically.

[Anonymous No.9124279]

>>9124276
i'm not asking if entropy can be reversed. i'm asking that if it grows at a logarithmic scale, would it be the most efficient system possible such that the notions of entropy reversal wouldn't be needed to achieve this physical immortality that's being thrown around? logarithmic is just an example but it's clarify what i'm thinking; the growth gets slower in non-polynomial time if that means anything.

[Anonymous No.9124281]

>>9124269
We've been authorized by the Pan Galactic Federatsiy to scroll to your time and use this rudimentary comm channel to say yes, we're laughing at you.

[Anonymous No.9124283]

>>9123953
well. Extended life under Western birth rates isn't a problem.
But if the birth rates in the Western world increase due to immigration from the 3rd world or developing countries, that have high birthrates, increasing the price of things in the market due to increased population and so increased demand.

[Anonymous No.9124308]

>>9124132
Memory isn't some storage room of arbitrary facts where random memories start getting pushed out when it gets full. Important memories can be remembered indefinitely, since they get refreshed every time you recall them.

Granted, your memories would get modified a little bit along the way, since mistakes in your recall ends up getting stored in the memory, but you'd still have a vivid sense of who you are, even if some of the facts wouldn't check out if someone tried to verify.

[Anonymous No.9124332]

>Atheists discussing eternity

[Anonymous No.9124371]

>>9124132

keep a fucking diary

[Anonymous No.9124374]

When technological singularity is achieved (some experts estimate it to happen in 50 years), biological immortality will be achieved quite likely

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

[Anonymous No.9124387]

>>9124374
Well, only if general AI don't decide to get rid of us.

[Anonymous No.9124416]

>>9124063
Wow. Another one who thinks that writing in all caps will convince people. Also grunting about entropy without knowing what it is will impress nobody of importance.

[Anonymous No.9124419]

>>9124226
My genetics may decide how I react to certain stimuli, but my genetics do not determine my everyday life. My day to day life is as much affected by my own decisions as it is the decisions of the strangers, coworkers, friends, and family who surround me.

[Anonymous No.9124426]

>>9124332
I don't get it but I'm also not atheist.

[Anonymous No.9124449]

>>9124063
Sure, but it's quite a difference between living 100 years and living a million, and living a million in software where you actually run 10000 times as fast as a a biological human.

[Anonymous No.9124452]

>>9124210
>There are ethical concerns with genetics research that prevent people from embracing it fully.
Only in the US and Europe

[Anonymous No.9124455]

>>9124258
>>9124371
This only goes so far.

Specifically as far as knowledge is concerned, many things simply have to be relearned. Consider, for instance, all the people who write a thesis at the end of their Masters or PhD and are unable to understand the material or follow the arguments several years later due to having left the field after graduating. There are countless examples out there really, think about all the people who at one point used to speak another language but over time forgot it, or think about all the people you've forgotten (maybe you can remember a few facial features, a scrap of an event, something, but in time the memory will be gone and it will be as if you never knew them).

There's also the bigger problem that if something happened so long ago that it hasn't affected your life for centuries, you don't remember it, and you can't even relate to it then what use is it to read about it? You may as well be reading someone else's diary.

>>9124308
>memories don't get pushed out when your memory gets full, memories get pushed out when they get old and you haven't thought about them in a long time
This is not any better.

I'm not saying immortality is misery, but it's also no cakewalk.

[Anonymous No.9124459]

>>9124169
kek
this is truly the best meme yet

[Anonymous No.9124460]

>>9123953
No, you're not even going to be the great great great grandparents of the first immortals. The closest thing you'll get is improved aging cream by the time you die. Immortality is something humans probably won't have for thousands of years lmao.

[Anonymous No.9124467]

>>9124455

Wait what's your point? Of course you're not going to remember every detail. People don't remember details about shit they did 10 years ago, but people don't consider it overwhelmingly miserable.

Consider being 1000 years old and you know that in the first 100 years you were a very successful professional musician, next 100 years you were game developer, then for 100 years you were genetics researcher and contributed considerably to science, etc.. would you feel miserable if you don't remember how to play that one song on piano?? Fuck no, people don't feel miserable for forgetting shit...

[Anonymous No.9124470]

>>9124455

Also when BMI-s advance, we could increase our memory capacity considerably

[Anonymous No.9124667]

>>9124169
NEETzsche

[Anonymous No.9124932]

>>9123975
>>9123995
>>9124077
Hmm slaves barking. Who told you I am like you.

Anyway don't fucking call yourselves scientists.

[Anonymous No.9124947]

>>9123953
Don't listen to the retards ITT. Yes, you have a good probability of making it, OP. And the good news is that you can influence the outcome. Donate to SENS and spread awareness about aging research.

[Anonymous No.9124957]

>>9124932
>t. FUCKING loves scientists

[Anonymous No.9125137]

If you were immortal how would you go about preventing the authorities from finding out and taking custody of you?

Asking for a friend desu

[Anonymous No.9125416]

>>9123953
> 80s
Not a chance.

[Anonymous No.9125447]

>>9123953
>make and exact copy of your DNA at the peak of your body's potential
>remove shortened DNA from ends of chromosomes and insert the cloned DNA
>repeat process so that you regain any genetic information lost when DNA replicates itself
Could it work?

[Anonymous No.9125452]

Yeah I seriously doubt we won't have so much antiaging technology in the next 50 years to keep us all alive much longer. We already have enough crap to make 70 year olds look half their age. People who are in their 20s now, we're in the middle of the most narcissistic group of people ever born. Nobody alive today wants to ever die. We used to have patriotism and religion and children and even scientific and artistic advancement to try to immortalize us in some way. People don't even reproduce as much. The only thing left to do is to actually become immortal. We will get better and better at this shit. In fifty years we'll all be getting stem cell steroid injections into our bones and living for 300 years

[Anonymous No.9125454]

>>9125452
>living for 300 years
Not good enough.

[Anonymous No.9125465]

>>9123953
I think immortality will be figured out in less than 100 years. Possibly even less than 75. Artificial Intelligence is going to create a utopia unless we tamper with it's programming. There are many solutions to immortality. Laws that don't let you have children if you want to be immortal could be one. Another thing is space for all the people. This is easy. Arcology. Food for the people: We will have to largely go plant based. Sorry not sorry. I've already made the transition to that and it was easy as fuck and my mental clarity has spiked. Also, We will have to stop being so politically correct about everything. If you have a question I'm sure I could answer.

[Anonymous No.9125466]

>>9125465
just to add on my point, it's going to be more likely about nanotechnology than gene editing.

[Anonymous No.9125475]

>>9124069
immortality =/= invulnerability there sport

[Anonymous No.9125478]

>>9125465
it could happen sooner but the planet's political awareness is very low brow

[Anonymous No.9125479]

>>9123953
>serious discussion about immortality
Fucking how? It's not a serious topic.

[Anonymous No.9125481]

>>9125447
where is this done? in every single cell?

[Anonymous No.9125487]

>>9125475
not necessarily. nanotechnology could be programmed enough in the future to be able to locate lost body parts and bring them back together. also force fields are a definite possibility and they could even be strong enough to withstand the temperatures of the sun ergo we could literally fly into the sun in the far future and probably without a spaceship.

[Anonymous No.9125489]

>>9125487
also to add to this the force field could be used with sensors and activated during a car crash or explosion.

[Anonymous No.9125498]

>>9123953
based on how shit like "we'll cure cancer and aids and will be on mars by 2000 and have world peace" turned out, we will increase lifespan by a good ammount and then kinda get disillusioned with the idea and pretend we achieved what we wanted by substantially lowering expectations nad chase another dream we come up with. Singularity or warp-speed or some shit.

[Anonymous No.9125500]

>>9124452
>implying any nation outside the US and Europe matters

[Anonymous No.9125503]

>>9125487
Save that for Facebook there Debra

[Anonymous No.9125508]

>>9125481
I think it'd have to be just so that no cell could ever die. If not, then the cells you didn't do this for would completely die off after enough replications.
Doesn't seem to practical though does it? I wouldn't want to have to go through this process every time a cell was about to die

[Anonymous No.9125512]

It's never gonna happen

[Anonymous No.9125518]

>>9125503
underestimating the singularity, i see.

[Anonymous No.9125526]

>>9125508
Yeah it's the worst kind of top down solution. Immortality will have to be engineered from birth. Strong DNA from birth not DNA repair.

[Anonymous No.9125550]

>>9123972
what riemann hypothesis tell us about bilogical immortality?

[Anonymous No.9125594]

>can't find a cure for the common cold
>retards think immortality will be discovered soon

[Anonymous No.9125765]

>believe in immortality
>don't do safe long term investments
>don't do anything to prepare for your expected lifespan

[Anonymous No.9125792]

Immortality is a easy when you know just about everything there is to know about science and technology. Knowing is easy when you are a supercomputer the size of a moon. Being a supercomputer the size of a moon is easy when you have trillions of robots building you. Building trillions of robots is easy when you have one robot that is capable of self-replication. Designing that one robot is easy when you have AI. Having an AI is easy when you have enough computing power combined with evolutionary algorithms. Having enough computing power is easy when you just wait for the GPUs of 2030 to arrive.

Exponential growth bitches.

[Anonymous No.9125836]

>>9123953
depends on how much money you make oldfag

[Anonymous No.9125886]

I hope not because only rich psychopathic freaks like Peter Thiel will get it.
At least now I can count on them dying eventually.

[Anonymous No.9126012]

If we actually manage to pull off AI without it blowing out in our faces then immortality (more like potentially infinite lifespan but who cares really) is trivial. honestly I´m more scared as to what will become of humanity when we are close to achieve that or we finally do so, as some people will go fucking crazy over the idea that we are obsolete
pic related?

[Anonymous No.9126045]

With humanism's suicide and world wealth being focused in china I'm sure a commoner stands great chance to gain access to immortality treatment. because he's special after, everyone said so in school.

[Anonymous No.9126100]

>>9124079
this

[Anonymous No.9126114]

>>9126012
AI is just a simulation of sapience not sapience, it works on discrete 1s and 0s

[Anonymous No.9126290]

>>9125594
>Believing the common cold being cured is due to technological incapability and not the fact that doing so would require us to round up and immunize all of humanity at once.

Curing the common cold has no cost effectiveness, that's why there's no effort to do so. You can cure a strain but it evolves a few times a season and is spread across the globe.

[Anonymous No.9126303]

>>9123953
How far are you from the necessary materials to build the machinery required?

[Anonymous No.9126345]

>>9126012
What's that webm from?

[Anonymous No.9126380]

>>9124258
>read book you wrote 2000 years ago
>realize it sucks and that you are a terrible writer

[Anonymous No.9126381]

>>9124467
All I'm seeing is all the multi hundred year depression people will have

[Anonymous No.9126388]

>>9123969
It's probably better for their mental health to have an inflated estimate of their life span.

[Anonymous No.9126394]

>>9124932
>Calling people slaves
Rich boi thinks money will pay for his immortality. Sorry only the .01% will get it, and it won't be about money. Something like immortality would be strictly regulated and only our rulers would get it.

[Anonymous No.9126407]

>>9124416
Particles align to form matter in such a way as to minimize their energy. Therefore, the energy is released in the surroundings and therefore increases entropy, which is believed to lead to a massive heat death of our universe.

[Anonymous No.9126440]

>"We" can't clone a human legally
>"We" can't practice eugenics
>"We" still have a taboo on performance enhancing drugs
>"We" still haven't colonised space
>"We" haven't sent a layman to space in his personal vehicle
>"our" biological milestone seems to be creating a superbug that eats fucking oil
>"We" are scared of genetic alteration of humans
>frankly on the grand scale "We" haven't achieved shit.
I'd say immortality is pretty fucking far away, and if it is possible, women will find a way to sabotage it so that "evil men can't live forever and immortalise the patriarchy"

[Anonymous No.9126506]

>>9126440
>(you)

[Anonymous No.9126578]

>>9123953

If I could get a gf with that body I'd be ready to accept the inevitability of death and die in peace.

[Anonymous No.9126589]

>>9126345
I'm wondering too. I wanna say the Animatrix but I'm not sure.

ps I'm hard as a rod rn.

[Anonymous No.9126645]

>>9126506
He is correct though

[Anonymous No.9126658]

>>9124071
>To make sure that consciousness in the hard drive is actually you, you would need a transfer of your consciousness, not a copy. I don't see how that would be possible though.

FFS, it's as simple as the old "Ship of Theseus" thought experiment - gradually replace the brain with machine so continuity of identity is preserved, rather than making a copy like a computer file.

That is, assuming consciousness is, in fact, a computable phenomena. Theories like Penrose's quantum account of mind might mean that it is not something amenable to computational simulation, i.e. Church-Turing Thesis, so it might be a hard task.

[Anonymous No.9127009]

>>9123953
This is a much more interesting subject than most people give it credit for.

Virtual immortality can basically be attained in one of two ways: Either biologically, as you said, or through transhumanism. While the two are somewhat connected, I think we can all agree that unless we get a ridiculously unprecedented amount of medical breakthroughs and discoveries in the next few decades, we won't be seeing biological immortality in our time. There is no "one" thing that can be done to make the human body immortal. To make a body immortal, you'd have to develop ways to immunize and regenerate the body in a million different ways, none of which are really known to us yet. And even if successful, you'd still be vulnerable to various kinds of accidents, violence, toxins, radiation, biological agents etc. Not to mention the fact that there are a whole lot of political and environmental obstacles to biological immortality to boot. IF this was possible in the next 200 years - and it seems pretty obvious that it really won't be -, it would absolutely not be something that was made available to the populace as a whole.

Realistically the cheapest, easiest and most practical form of immortality would be transhumanism. That is, moving the consciousness from your brain to a computer, into a simulated reality. Now, this needs a fucking shit ton of medical and technological advancements to become reality, but there's at least a remote chance that it could happen in the next 40 or so years that us 80's people have left, on average.

(... cont ->)

[Anonymous No.9127010]

>>9127009
>>9123953
(continuing..)

Transhumanism would be quite different. It's much easier to store, secure and repair digital data, than to protect a biological body against everything in the physical world. A digitally stored mind would create virtually no strain on the environment. More importantly, the more advanced our technology becomes, the cheaper it would be to store people's minds and to simulate their digital environments. It's basically a given that if we reach the level of technology where transhumanism is possible on a large scale, then the equivalent of a Moore's law will make sure that the price, storage space and power requirements of storing human minds digitally will develop much, much faster than people can ever reproduce and die off to add more strain to the system. Point being, if this tech becomes reality, then so does the fact that we CAN let *everyone* live forever, digitally.

The fear of death, and the desire to live is such a basic human feeling, that there would be a massive demand for such a system. So it's not at all unlikely that in such an event, some government somewhere would create a nation-wide cloud of immortality where every tax-paying, working citicen would be guaranteed to spend a virtual eternity upon the death of their physical bodies.

Now whether some natural disaster, war, human greed and bullshit like hacking or other malevolence would at some point cause irreparable damage to that system or not, is another matter. But if transhumanism does become possible, it's practically a 100% certainty that it WILL become the norm of our daily lives. Simply because the costs and downsides would so quickly become so negligible, that there's no reason not to do it, when it would be the most powerful motivator for the living that any nation has ever imagined.

[Anonymous No.9127030]

>>9127010
>>9123953
(...cont)

The Black Mirror series (currently on Netflix) had an episode about this. I recommend you check it out. Transhumanism would eventually transform our society. All people from the point the system was created could live on in various kinds of simulated worlds with other real people and AI pretending to be people at the same time. With advanced robotics, people could enter the physical world through avatars like in the movie The Surrogate to greet their grandchildren, or real people could use interface devices to visit the digital world and meet their grand-grand-grand parents instead.

Philosophically speaking, unless we blow ourselves up, are destroyed by a planetary natural disaster, or find some new ultimate restrictions on the development of technology (which seems unlikely given that optic chips and quantum computers are no more than a decade or two away), this outcome is inevitable. The only question is, will it come in time for us, or not. Whatever the case, it seems likely that we are on the very edge of that turning point in human history... born just close enough to barely make it, or just far enough to barely miss it by a generation or two.

[Anonymous No.9127036]

>>9127009
>>9127010
>>9127030
That is a lot of popsci garbage right there. Mind uploading is a fucking meme. Cloning a personality doesn't "transfer" or "preserve" your consciousness.

Either put your hopes in life extension through some combinational anti-aging cocktail along with stem cell reprogramming to rejuvenate tissues and hope for the best or just accept your mortality.

[Anonymous No.9127090]

>>9127036
Can always trust that someone will come along, have no clue what's being talked about, get all flustered and start puffing. Don't be the prime example of Dunning Kruger please, nothing is more obnoxious or dangerous than an idiot who's so 100% sure of himself he doesn't even bother doing any research, but just starts attacking everyone like a child would.

If you honestly believe that the human consciousness can't be moved then you can't be more than yet another dualist like any religious nutjob.

Even a cursory research (or just common sense, if you're smart enough) on the subject will quickly point out that our brain cells die and are replaced all the time, throughout our lives. Just like the rest of our body. Even if neurons have an extremely low - even negative - turnover rate, it doesn't change the fact that this cell replacement does occur. The concept is therefore very simple: simply replace dying brain cells with exactly similar, but digital components on a computer.

Because consciousness in a material world (and not your dualistic "muh consciousness!", "muh soul!" bullshit) is nothing but an emergent property of the billions of neurons, chemicals and pathways in our brain, all of this can be mapped bit by bit thus gradually moving all of what you are into a digitized form.

There is *nothing* even remotely impossible about that. The only reason we can't, is because we don't have a sufficient understanding of the human brain, or the level of technology required. Yet.

[Anonymous No.9127115]

stay healthy, prevention is the best cure

make lots of money, because whatever treatment is going to cost lots of moolah

[Anonymous No.9127144]

But I wouldn't wanna live forever even if I could

[Anonymous No.9127145]

>>9127090
All of this is speculative as all hell. Philosophically I'd agree that this is possible but we can't be sure. I sure would like to know how you would replace dying neurons with "digital components on a computer". This is so vague it might as well mean nothing.

Not to mention that "you" are not simply your brain. The rest of your body is not just muscle. The endocrine system plays a primary role in secreting hormones to regulate bodily processes, and all of this starts from the brain. The brain is not just something you can put in a vat and hope it works. This is a fundamental misunderstanding. You'd have to emulate a whole lot more if you wanted to "transfer" your "consciousness", whatever that means.

And last but not least, you're delusional if you think we'll figure out all the parts of our brains and how to emulate them, much less have the technology and supercomputers required AND a protocol to actually transfer the consciousness rather than create a copy. Nobody's talking about transferring anything yet, the emulation you read about in popsci circles is about making copies. Good luck getting around that one.

[Anon !!3wHWqEMsmPf No.9127220]

>>9124374
That's not how science works. A singularity would only have the amount of information already available to humankind along with any connections between the parts of that information. To gain new information that mankind doesn't already have, it would need to run actual physical experiments to obtain empirical data, which would take time and resources.

Saying that the singularity means automatic scientific infinity is equivalent to assuming that all a scientist does is think really really hard until he or she discovers something. Again:
>That's not how science works.

[Anonymous No.9127232]

>>9127220
If you know something is not understood but then you make a connection between that thing and something that is understood such that the thing that is not understood is now understood a little better, is that not science?

[Anonymous No.9127258]

>>9124467
lol don't forget to add
>president for 100 years
>trillionaire for 1000 years
>professional basketball player for 100 years
>rock star for 100 years
>famous movie star for 100 years
>actually a jet plane for 100 years
>prom king and overall coolest guy in high school for 100 years
>famous internet meme for 100 years
>universe famous artist for 100 years
>super model for 100 years
>sex god for 100 years

[Anonymous No.9127452]

>>9127090
Lol nope. Our neurons do NOT die and replenish, they only grow until adulthood and then begin to die until you are dead. It's not about being a negative turnover rate, it literally DOES NOT HAPPEN. When you lose your brain, it's gone forever.
The "ship of Theseus' thought experiment literally doesn't work when it comes to our brain. Stop reading lesswrong and Kurzweil, it makes you look like a fucking brainlet. Fuck off back to r/futurology, idiot.

[Anonymous No.9127657]

>>9127452
You don't even retain most of the atoms in your body for a full year, which obviously means that the neurons in your brain are now mostly made up of atoms that weren't there before and all the atoms that made up those neurons just under a year ago are now dispersed elsewhere, so yes Theseus' Ship still applies

>>9127220
Implying quantum computers (which have the potential to perform more calculations in a second than there are atoms in the universe) won't be able to run simulated experiments that would behave almost exactly according to the laws of physics with even every individual atom being accounted for

[Anonymous No.9127660]

WHY WOULD I WANT TO LIVE FOREVER WITH THAT FEEL WHEN NO GF??!!?

[Anonymous No.9127677]

I doubt it. Our bodies are like machines, and eventually everything will have to be replaced, from the muscles within our hearts to the neurons in our brains.

If we keep repairing or replacing tissues, eventually we won't be... Us. We will be just a sack of synthetic materials containing memories. Memories is really what makes us human, a conscious.

As much as I'd love to be immortal, or cryogenically freeze myself for a few thousand years just to see what amazing things the future hold, I'll just have to live through it in Sci-Fi stuff.

[Anonymous No.9127764]

>>9127660
With transhumanism you could be the most handsome fucker ever created. But you don't need to wait for that. VR has come to stay. While I've no idea if we'll reach a level of technology where physical sensations can be simulated sufficiently well in our lifetimes, it's basically guaranteed that unless Trump starts WW3, we will have sufficient VR with sufficient level AI to simulate all the good (and none of the bad) women have to offer by the end of the next two decades. If mind transfer becomes reality, you can literally have true love with a perfect AI woman the likes of which until now has only been attainable in literature and entertainment flicks.

The birth rates of the western societies, directly correlating with the level of advancement of the societies are more than enough proof of where this is heading anyway. Men and women are typically not compatible, unless there's enough external pressure and the right circumstances to force them to it. We're just among the first generations to actually see this in real life.

[Anonymous No.9127770]

>>9124132
>Be mortal
>Die

[Anonymous No.9127795]

>>9127090
>>9127090
How about instead of all that bullshit you link us some studies about your ""transhumanism"" ? Look, I get it, at your age it is easy to be influenced by such TV shows that you so eloquently mentioned in one of your posts. It's natural. But please refrain from believing such utter nonsense, I could make a show about how sucking horse dicks makes you immortal with some impossible logic behind it, but you see, then there'll be people like you who'll start trying that shit. It is easy to say shit like "haha what if like, you know like we were like gods and shit and we don't know it ? Like quantum computers bro like we upload our mind to that supercomputer haha we could connect to the matrix ahaha". Stop smoking weed you fucking faggot assnigger. It s clear from your posts that you are a normalfag and the only example of dunning-kruger here. Stop posting that nonsense this instant because it's people like you who take the whole discussion down to the gutters. Screw transhumanism, you could try being a transgender first.

[Anonymous No.9128538]

>>9127795
This was a fun read. :) Really, especially the assnigger, fucking brilliant! I'm gonna use that.

But to be serious, did you have a point other than just random ranting? I mean, you didn't actually say anything, or contribute in any manner at all.

I shouldn't state the obvious for those without reading comprehension (or just prone to throw baits every which way) but I didn't proclaim to know anything with any certainty. I specifically listed the several variables involved, and said - and I quote - "there's at least a remote chance that it could happen in the next 40 or so years". Speculation. Pure and simple. I'm glad I triggered someone with that at least. I mean, I would've done something wrong if at least *one* person didn't find an excuse to get all offended and enraged over it, in this day and age.

[Anonymous No.9128615]

>>9127795
Fckn lul brainlet normie BTFO

[Anonymous No.9128631]

>>9123995
autista*

[Anonymous No.9128641]

>>9125500
If they're all going to be immortal then yes.

[Anonymous No.9128651]

immortality never. it's a fairy tale atheist technoutopians tell themselves because they're too cowardly to accept death. a religion for the metaphysically challenged.

[Anonymous No.9128652]

>>9123953
I thought you said immorality w that pic.

I worry if people live forever, they will be abused.

[Anonymous No.9128658]

>>9128652
Don't worry, once proper virtual reality simulations develop in the future, everybody's gonna be too busy living there instead of reality. Both street crime and organised state crime will automatically drop since everyone will have better things to do.

[Anonymous No.9128846]

>>9123953

why would i want to live forever? living forever is something such an arrogant concept that only a boomer could have dreamed it up.

people are tiresome, and this world is tiresome. i am looking forward to the peaceful oblivion of death.

it better be fucking peaceful...

[Anonymous No.9128884]

>>9128846
Why wouldn't you?

Yes, life as it is NOW, is boring, repetitive, and limited. But in a simulated world where you could live over and over in a world made of stuff you can't even imagine yet, where everything would be as perfect as it could ever be in an infinite number of ways... why wouldn't you want to live forever? Or at least, until you had explored all that the furthest reaches of your imagination and understanding could reach?

[Anonymous No.9128903]

>>9128884

because all living things are meant to die. it is part of our spiritual progression towards spiritual perfection.

sorry to get /x/ here, but ffs what makes you so special that you need to grace the earth with 1000 or 100000 years of your presence?

[Anonymous No.9128936]

>>9128903
Nothing at all. Why would I need to be special for that? It's a matter of convenience, of the fact that if such a tech is developed, in a very short amount of time after that it would become so cheap anyone could afford it.

So why not?

[Anonymous No.9128953]

>>9128903
People will say anything to discourage people from this type of thinking. They will even resort, as in your case, to talking about spirituality. Existence right now is boring, so just allow people to brainstorm. It may even be in your best of interest one day.

[Anonymous No.9128964]

>>9128903
>meant to
Nothing is "meant to" do anything. Can you prove your claims?

>spiritual
say what now

[Anonymous No.9128968]

>>9128936

If you transfer your mind / consciousness to a thing, you will cease to be human and become a thing also. Madness lies in that path.

>>9128953

Just waxing philosophic dude. I have no vested interest in your desire to transfer to a toaster of your mums wireless dildo. It just seems horrifying from a spiritual perspective.

>>9128964

m'lady

[Anonymous No.9128971]

>>9128964
I was about to post something extremely similar to this. These arguments against living forever can be downright lame.

[Anonymous No.9128972]

>>9128968
>m'lady
so you have no argument and concede then?

[Anonymous No.9128974]

>>9128968
>I have no vested interest in your desire to transfer to a toaster of your mums wireless dildo.
What the hell are you talking about? Seriously, leave these threads to adults, and go somewhere else with your idiotic babbling.

[Anonymous No.9128977]

>>9128972

I feel no need to argue my opinions. You are welcome to yours. I respect them, but I may still have to talk shit.

>>9128974

Aw did I hurt your feelings with my idiotic babbling?

[Anonymous No.9128986]

>>9128977
>I feel no need to argue my opinions. You are welcome to yours. I respect them, but I may still have to talk shit.
I don't have a problem with people mocking my or other opinions, but I do appreciate when they argue their own opinion and put it out there for others to shit on.

Anyway, this thread is about "biological immortality", not transferring to a toaster or robot. Others have talked about mind uploading ITT, but the OP you quoted is about life extension essentially, not replacing your brain with a virtual one.

[Anonymous No.9128994]

>>9128986

My apologies. I should pay more attention when I am shitposting.

I have the energy for drive by opining, but not arguing.


Carry on.

[Anonymous No.9129006]

>>9125137

Live longer than the authorities, they'll never know. Also, if you're immortal, you should be able to accumulate enough wealth to fund a private army.

[Anonymous No.9129118]

>>9124071
A transfer could be done with gradual implementation of synthetic neurons and computer hardware powerful enough to contain the information equivalent of a human mind and its abilities, but that doesn't seem likely anywhere in the next few centuries, let alone in our lifetime.

[Anonymous No.9129121]

>>9124226
Genetics may be what determines selfhood, but why is individual selfhood your ultimate definition of value?

[Anonymous No.9129141]

>>9129118
We could arrive at such technology by first expanding life in other ways.

[Anonymous No.9129145]

>>9127009
>To make a body immortal, you'd have to develop ways to immunize and regenerate the body in a million different ways, none of which are really known to us yet.
There is an alternative option to immortality: make regular copies of the brain state (using the same methodology that would be involved in uploading, except with the additional requirement that it is nondestructive), and if you die, grow an all-new body and a brain that you restore from backup.

The "grow a new body" part seems like something that will be available earlier than either uploading OR the form of biological immortality that you describe (we are close to growing organs in a tank already, full bodies can't be THAT far off). Restoring a brain from backup will probably be more challenging, and it seems on first sight to be more difficult than emulating a brain; but I could see this part being unexpectedly feasible relative to emulation.

[Anonymous No.9129208]

>>9128903
>spiritual

Fuck off cuck

[Anonymous No.9129418]

>>9128903
Sorry man, but there are too many fedoras here like >>9129208 for that argument to work. Materialists all, scared of oblivion and desperate to clutch at straws of transhumanist salvation peddled by Kurzweil et al.

[Anonymous No.9129451]

>>9124169
facts, quantum immortality is real

[Anonymous No.9129462]

>>9129145

The new copy would be a new entity. A copy of the original. It is immortality in basically the same sense having children is. If you wish to preserve your particular self, it won't do.

[Anonymous No.9129500]

>>9129418
No philosophy that rejects materialism can hope to stand in the 21st century. Sorry if this triggers your anus, faggot.

[Anonymous No.9129512]

>>9129500
Process philosophy stands pretty fucking well.

[Anonymous No.9129542]

>>9129512
>process """"""""""philosophy""""""""""

[Anonymous No.9129563]

>>9129542
Created by the co-author of Principia Mathematica, the most important work in formal logic bar none. >>9129500 invoked philosophy in the first place, with all going down that path entails.

[Anonymous No.9129574]

mass immortality would screw us over because we cant pay to have a 90% of the population retired

[Anonymous No.9129617]

>>9124071
Every time you go to sleep your stream of consciousness is stopped for a few hours before REM, and you wake up as someone that thinks they're you.
Just upload your conciousness when you're asleep, someone kills your real body and mind, then you wake up inside the computer. It could have already happened and you wouldn't know.

[Anonymous No.9129673]

>>9128846
>people are tiresome, and this world is tiresome.

Don't apply your misanthrope thinking on everyone

[Anonymous No.9129675]

>>9124132
an Elephant in it's later years still remembered with 100% the steps how to execute people (it was used for executions). Literally did the entire thing on a dummy.

[Anonymous No.9129680]

>>9124455
Anon human memories are literally the "best of moments" or to put it better compilation clips.

Id it's important you will remember it actively, not as important it can be brought out with varying amounts of effort.

[Anonymous No.9129726]

>>9128846
this guy gets it. living forever seems like it would be awful. imagine being reincarnated and living the same existence over, and over, and over again. i'd honestly rather die at some point, considering that the nature of existence is completely pointless. being consciously aware of the pointlessness and repetitiveness of existence and having to live it infinitely is a fate much worse than death. i don't get how people are so invested in their existence. they posture to seem all special and cool even though their worth is the same as anything that has existed, currently exists, and will ever exist in the universe. that worth is nothing. the world would be a better place if people could just understand that truth.

[Anonymous No.9129747]

>>9129675
Elephants don't even live as long as humans, anon. Still, since you seem to have no problem using an anecdote as an argument, here is a Mathematics PhD who is unable to remember or understand their own thesis a few years later.
https://medium.com/@fjmubeen/ai-no-longer-understand-my-phd-dissertation-and-what-this-means-for-mathematics-education-1d40708f61c

>>9129680
The problem is: If it has not been important for a long time then you will forget it. The point I was making was:
>If there were things that at one point were centrally important to your life and you can no longer even remember them as a result of them not being important for too long, then on what basis do you justify the importance of the things that are in your life now.

Either way, the issue isn't exactly memory. Rather it's about being able to justify all the short transient shit we fill our lives with as being truly "meaningful". Think about everything you're looking forward to right now, everything that occupies your time, all the people you care about, and all the things you stress over. Will you remember all of this in 30,000 years? If you'd been an immortal wandering the Earth, would you remember the same sorts of things from 30,000 years ago?

I think an immortal might need to change their approach and perspective on life and meaning in order to find true fulfillment.

>>9127770
Also tragic in different ways. Though there is already a wealth of writing out there on finding meaning in a finite life.

>>9124467
>Consider being 1000 years old and you know that in the first 100 years you were a very successful professional musician, next 100 years you were game developer, then for 100 years you were genetics researcher and contributed considerably to science, etc..
These are very unrealistic aspirations, anon. More than likely your life will have hundreds of much shorter chapters comprised of mundane stuff.

[Anonymous No.9129810]

>>9128903
>what makes you so special that you need to grace the earth with 1000 or 100000 years of your presence?
Nothing, but I do want to experience a ton of things that I will simply will not have the time to enjoy normally before dying
>>9128968
>If you transfer your mind / consciousness to a thing, you will cease to be human and become a thing also. Madness lies in that path.
one, the thing you transfer your mind to might as well be a perfected human body
two, what is being human, really? when exactly do you cross the line?

[Anonymous No.9129818]

>>9126407
Humans do things that directly go against the immediate tendencies particles therefore your input to this thread was useless.

[Anonymous No.9129827]

>>9126100
Is there actual proof of what's physically possible or are you an addition to the the long line of overconfident people who turned out to be wrong?

Also, genome editing technology and controlled fetal development have the potential to harness the genetic destinies of our children.

[Anonymous No.9129828]

>>9126114
Neurons are fundamentally 1s and 0s, idiot?

[Anonymous No.9129923]

>>9129828
Not that guy, but biological neurons are more complex than that.

[Anonymous No.9129939]

>>9129451
any1 else has this gut feeling?

[Anonymous No.9129943]

>>9129500
materialism gets btfo by

>qualia
>hard problem of consciousness
>nde's
>QM

[Anonymous No.9130365]

>>9129943
>NDE

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.9130371]

What causes ''''''''''natural'''''''''' death?

[Anonymous No.9130388]

>>9129943
>says materialism gets blown out by issues it hasn't solved yet
So what you mean to say, is that you would rather support the spiritual bullshit like religions which have shrunk to a fraction of what they are, as almost every little thing that used to be divine and spiritual - which was basically everything just 1000 years ago -, has since been proven to be just materialistic, by science.

So there's two guys, materialism and dualism. And you ask a question. Dualism spews bullshit, you think "hmm, ok I guess so", then materialism gets up and moves his ass off and away, goes to do some research, comes back and proves to you the definite answer, the experiments with which you can beyond a doubt test and verify his answer, and proves that he literally found out what was going on and now knows what to do with it. Then you pop another question. Same shit, the dualist spews spiritual nonsense, the materialist again finds the answer.

Rinse repeat a literal million times. Every time, the same story. Every single fucking time, the materialist finds out what the fuck is going on.

Then, on top of those millions of questions the materialist got right, you pop 4 more questions. Qualia, consciousness, NDE's, QM. And the materialist says "hold on, let me go get that"... and suddenly you go "A HA! So you don't know!". The materialist says "Yeah not yet, gonna have to go dig them up like always". And suddenly, in your massive brainshitstorm of a mental fabric assmonkey breakdown, you go "Oh I guess the dualist must be right this time!".

Like, literally. What the actual fuck?

Well it doesn't matter. Because like every single time before, the materialist is gonna come back from his trip, and tell you what's really going on. It'll take a while, but that will happen. Just like every single time before.

[Anonymous No.9130390]

>>9130388
Oh and right, and as for NDE, I just copypasta'd your shit over there. Santa Claus doesn't belong in science, so ignore it.

[Anonymous No.9130402]

>>9129943
QM btfo idealism, because Copenhagen interpretation is contradictory, and Everett interpretation is materialistic.

[Anonymous No.9130409]

b-but muh TRANSHUMANISM YOU BIGOT I USE MEME WORDS I AM RIGHT

[Anonymous No.9130873]

>>9130409
>using meme words to make fun of people using meme words

[Anonymous No.9130885]

>>9123953
please excuse my brainlet take on this, but...

... I am a chronic illness sufferer. As such, I belong to and browse groups of others like, and of course we all end up in waiting rooms together (lotsa young folks, for some reason). It's difficult sitting there while some guy in a wheelchair screams in pain in between labored breaths. I'm fortunately not there yet, but like everybody in my situation, the outlook is bleak. So the point, I guess, is that if so many are currently suffering from autoimmune or long term injuries, when will the leap occur from eradicating that to immortality? If we mainly deal in steroids and pain control, it's kind of obvious that we aren't able to tackle these complex systems. I understand that it's hard work and we're just not there, but this is a gulf that it seems would be crossed long before immortality, yet we appear nowhere near it. To a person in this situation, the whole of medical progress seems laughable. It feels very much like the dark ages

I guess maybe the singularity bit is what most are pinning their hopes to. I can't really speak to that. I just know that tissues are a conundrum in modern medicine. seems like they can implant or cut, but not repair, or control the complex electrical activities. I'm again not saying that they should be able to, I just imagine that hurdle comes well before biological immortality for the existing population

[Anonymous No.9132395]

bumpty do

[Anonymous No.9133095]

>>9123953
i'll be honest with you, you'd have better responses asking this on /b/ rather than here