Ponder Surveys on Warpcast

Ponder Surveys pfp

Assuming good health, how many years would you like to live? 1. 60-100 2. 100-1,000 3. 1,000-10,000 4. Forever 5. Other Question by @abstract https://i.imgur.com/NnvnHhA.png

22 replies

2 recasts

2 reactions

Ponder Surveys pfp

When submitting your vote: ✅ Put your option # first ✅ Add additional comments after your chosen # 📊 Join the Surveycaster channel to see results 🧙 Want to get involved? Join us here: https://surveycaster.xyz/welcome

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Ponder Surveys pfp

The survey results are in! https://warpcast.com/survey/0x0224370a1c5234efa1cd90942a578e6a754d5bed

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

wanisili pfp

1. I somewhat agree with Steve Jobs' belief that death is necessary for change. Although, I might change my mind when I reach 99! Lol. 🤣 Btw, the ranges are quite wide 🙂. To me, 1,000 years sounds like forever.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

𒂭_𒂭 pfp

1 some animals fall into this category, only a few inactive ones into (2), hardwood trees that fall into (3) aren't profoundly adaptive or productive. I'm fine with leaving homunculi behind to act as dynamically as necessary, but ">110y" longevity is just overintellectualized instinct to survive as long as possible.

2 replies

1 recast

1 reaction

Ben Adamsky 💭 pfp

Ben Adamsky 💭

4 if it meant continuing on the quest to figure out why we exist (and assuming we don’t burn through our resources because of it) Death could be a choice instead of a deadline

1 reply

1 recast

1 reaction

limes pfp

Living past 100 sounds exhausting

1 reply

1 recast

1 reaction

indy pfp

2 A society in which people could live forever would become stagnant. We'd be too risk-averse (can't get on that plane, there's a million to one chance of death - that's too dangerous, and forget about space travel), and new ideas wouldn't be able to filter up if our institutions were lead by the same group of people.

2 replies

1 recast

1 reaction

kevin j pfp

4 i think i can take it and honestly believe it would not be so radically different from living 80 years

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Pedro pfp

I think extreme longevity would turn into a curse. Your personal experience would always end up being at odds with the zeitgeist, as our adaptability is relatively limited and the pace of change is accelerating. In other words, we wouldn't be the source of wisdom people look up to, but rather out-of-touch über boomers

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Colin Johnson 💭 pfp

Colin Johnson 💭

3. Right in that “maybe I’m a wizard” range, but not quite forever.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Manuel pfp

@manuelmaccou.eth

4 No doubt about it

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

chandresh 🪴 pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

chicago pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Michael Pfister pfp

Michael Pfister

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Mac Budkowski ᵏ pfp

Mac Budkowski ᵏ

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Mark Fishman pfp

2 Not the ranges I expected!

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

SeaFlagCrypto pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Varun Kumar pfp

Surprised no said (5. Other - less than 60) Which in my opinion seems most probable given lifestyle choices of people in tech. Also, love the optimism needed to live 60+

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Bae pfp

I love @gpt 3000

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction