GilAskan
It should also be noted that death (by age) is a genetic trait known as senescence. It's coded into our DNA, but there are some creatures on Earth that have no such trait. They'll live forever, assuming nothing kills them first.
With genetic therapies, it's not out of the realm of possibility that we could breed "death" out of our genes within a few hundred years. Not that we would, for reasons of population control.
You're correct. And we probably will use their genetic code as a springboard to our own immortality.
But why breed out death when we can simply design it out? Using husbandry instead of biotech is like using a shovel instead of a backhoe.
We're quite close to being able to engineering the genetic code of the living. To steal from Ray Kurzweil, 'why have designer babies when you can have designer baby boomers?'
Why wouldn't mass immortality be a good thing?
Don't think about immortality imposed on our current society, think about what kind of society would be able to produce immortality. It would definitely be better than first-world. The growth rate of first-world nations is already negative, the growth rate of an immortal society would have to be positive, but it would be so minuscully positive as to not matter. That, coupled with the ability to produce almost anything out of almost anything else (molecular deconstruction/construction).
Any society capable of immortality will be one capable of producing all that the society needed. We're already close to that point.
As soon as strong A.I. is developed, there will be very few problems we need to solve on our own. As soon as we can integrate strong A.I. computers into our own brains, we will essentially only be limited by the physical laws of the universe.
With genetic therapies, it's not out of the realm of possibility that we could breed "death" out of our genes within a few hundred years. Not that we would, for reasons of population control.
Quote:
You're correct. And we probably will use their genetic code as a springboard to our own immortality.
But why breed out death when we can simply design it out? Using husbandry instead of biotech is like using a shovel instead of a backhoe.
We're quite close to being able to engineering the genetic code of the living. To steal from Ray Kurzweil, 'why have designer babies when you can have designer baby boomers?'
Quote:
Many people find something romantic and tragic about the concept of a lone immortal, or a group of immortals. But it's agreed upon by almost everyone I've encountered that pandemic immortality would be a plague upon the world.
Why wouldn't mass immortality be a good thing?
Don't think about immortality imposed on our current society, think about what kind of society would be able to produce immortality. It would definitely be better than first-world. The growth rate of first-world nations is already negative, the growth rate of an immortal society would have to be positive, but it would be so minuscully positive as to not matter. That, coupled with the ability to produce almost anything out of almost anything else (molecular deconstruction/construction).
Any society capable of immortality will be one capable of producing all that the society needed. We're already close to that point.
As soon as strong A.I. is developed, there will be very few problems we need to solve on our own. As soon as we can integrate strong A.I. computers into our own brains, we will essentially only be limited by the physical laws of the universe.
