borodutch
@warpcastadmin.eth
gm, if you are alive in the next 30 years, chances are you're going to live forever it is stupid to risk this immortality by doing things that can kill you beforehand
27 replies
4 recasts
43 reactions
Ben Adamsky đź’
@ba
Have thought about this kinda stuff for years. What level of immortality do you think we need to really “live forever”? I think we’re close to biological immortality aka reverse aging, but we’re still prone to diseases & environment, and our brains are still primed for shorter lifespans. How do we progress?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
borodutch
@warpcastadmin.eth
either biological or artificial technically, we can avoid a lot of issues by having artificial organs too!
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben Adamsky đź’
@ba
I’d say biological is prob the right path in the short-term (the next several generations). Even if we somehow had the tech, I’m sure most people prob couldn’t handle being placed in a synthetic body. Even though we’ll face major humanity issues like resource scarcity, I’m very bullish on longevity.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
borodutch
@warpcastadmin.eth
also, resource scarcity is almost non-existent, even at 8b people we have resource abundance we also have a whole galaxy of resources to exploit
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben Adamsky đź’
@ba
Today yes, but if we reverse aging without unlocking true immortality (no need for food, water, etc), we create a system where there’s a lot more births than deaths, which will inevitably create more scarcity. It’ll mean a stronger urgency to explore the galaxy and be more resourceful on a faster timeframe.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
