I didn't realize that we've made any progress towards extending the maximum human lifespan. It's probably a lot harder than we think. I guess we're at the point where Jules Verne was in the late 19th century; we like to dream big.
A civilisation where people can live arbitrarily long lives may have some interesting consequences. For one, cultural stagnation caused by people with entrenched beliefs sticking around. A lot of social progress and scientific development happens over the dead bodies of the old holdouts.
Then in the beginning at least there is the risk of extreme social inequality and a gerontocratic ruling class. Only the wealthy will have access to life extension and it may be the wealthy power structures that deny the technology to other people.
Finally, a civilisation made up of long-lived individuals may become extremely risk-averse, with possible consequences of reduced experimentation, creativity and rebellion. They may also turn out a little like what Larry Niven makes of the Puppeteer race: powerful, cowardly creatures, highly ritualistic, paternalistic and soft-totalitarian.
There's a short story of a woman who was a bit of a luddite, but late in life her children and grandchildren convinced her to adopt "upgrades" here and there, until she became almost entirely virtual. She retained much of her humanity, but was able to be in many places at once, "inhabiting" purpose-built bodies, and building up a certain reputation and popularity. Eventually humanity's probes make contact with aliens, and she's chosen to be humanity's ambassador.
I wish I could recall the name of that story, but it always painted a pleasant picture of immortality to me. Hopefully someone here recognizes it and can share it with us.
They aren't speaking literally. From my point of view, a human who can live, say, 10,000 years is as good as 'immortal'. Sure its literally wrong, but I heard webster now defines 'literally' as 'figuratively' so I'm ready to give up on pedantry.
Even if we had a "permanent" energy source, we have only a finite number of atoms. So one day we would actually also be guaranteed to cycle our thoughts.
Assuming we could keep the human body alive forever, I don't think we could handle it a person would eventually go insane. Also it would get incredibly boring at some point and I imagine the suicide rate would be somewhere near a 100% or at minimum people would allow themselves to die.
I definitely don't want to live forever.
So my answer is No, and no one will ever be immortal.
What is boring about it? Is living 40 years more boring than living 30? What about living 1000 years instead of living 100 years? At what point does it become boring?
It's hard for humans to conceptualize eternity, so don't think of it in those terms. If I could live in my current body for 1000 years, I'd still never get around to most of my backlog of things I'd like to do.
Boredom is mostly caused by lack of purpose IMO. As long as there is something to learn, something to explore, something to achieve, something new or pleasurable to experience, boredom is the last thing I'd worry about.
It really depends on what sort of definition you have for immortality. I would say in this case it would be the ability to live until you choose for yourself not to live any longer, not necessarily that you can never die.
I disagree that it would drive people insane, though, excepting the increasing chances for mental illness to set in as we age which I would assume would be solved as a part of the implementation of immortality as a concept. Our perception of time changes as we age, the passing of a single year takes on less and less meaning each time, becomes less of a milestone and more of just another regular occurrence. Depending on how we go about achieving immortality, time may take on dimensions we can't currently understand, and we may even have the option to choose not to perceive its passing at all.
I don't see how boredom could possibly be a problem. There are so many things I'd find interesting to do, but which are not important enough to warrant the time investment for me - like earn phds in all the sciences, learn a multitude of languages, read and re-read all of the classic literature (in the original language), learn how to paint, to sculpt, to create music. I could spend centuries trying to (re)prove all of the historically important math theoroms. I could spend centuries learning as many martial arts as I could. A few centuries playing chess, a few centuries playing go.
And those are all things I could do without the internet nor virtual reality.
scarmig|11 years ago
ffn|11 years ago
jmorrow977|11 years ago
melling|11 years ago
iwwr|11 years ago
Then in the beginning at least there is the risk of extreme social inequality and a gerontocratic ruling class. Only the wealthy will have access to life extension and it may be the wealthy power structures that deny the technology to other people.
Finally, a civilisation made up of long-lived individuals may become extremely risk-averse, with possible consequences of reduced experimentation, creativity and rebellion. They may also turn out a little like what Larry Niven makes of the Puppeteer race: powerful, cowardly creatures, highly ritualistic, paternalistic and soft-totalitarian.
flycaliguy|11 years ago
crimsonalucard|11 years ago
Zikes|11 years ago
I wish I could recall the name of that story, but it always painted a pleasant picture of immortality to me. Hopefully someone here recognizes it and can share it with us.
moyix|11 years ago
iwwr|11 years ago
It's available for free at Stross' blog: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/accelera...
mhurron|11 years ago
gallamine|11 years ago
walterbell|11 years ago
SAI_Peregrinus|11 years ago
jshevek|11 years ago
Zikes|11 years ago
darkmighty|11 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_recurrence_theore...
So for me true immortality is not only about unbounded time but also unbounded size, neither of which seems achievable.
For all purposes of regular human condition though, an approximation is good enough.
crimsonalucard|11 years ago
tenpoundhammer|11 years ago
I definitely don't want to live forever.
So my answer is No, and no one will ever be immortal.
pyrrhotech|11 years ago
It's hard for humans to conceptualize eternity, so don't think of it in those terms. If I could live in my current body for 1000 years, I'd still never get around to most of my backlog of things I'd like to do.
Boredom is mostly caused by lack of purpose IMO. As long as there is something to learn, something to explore, something to achieve, something new or pleasurable to experience, boredom is the last thing I'd worry about.
Zikes|11 years ago
I disagree that it would drive people insane, though, excepting the increasing chances for mental illness to set in as we age which I would assume would be solved as a part of the implementation of immortality as a concept. Our perception of time changes as we age, the passing of a single year takes on less and less meaning each time, becomes less of a milestone and more of just another regular occurrence. Depending on how we go about achieving immortality, time may take on dimensions we can't currently understand, and we may even have the option to choose not to perceive its passing at all.
jshevek|11 years ago
And those are all things I could do without the internet nor virtual reality.
mattmanser|11 years ago
Hi Matt, going on the Mars Safari is your favourite memory.
Siri, store Mars Safari memories, wipe from my soft drive and book a ticket on a Mars safari.
Never bored again.
crimsonalucard|11 years ago
I'd do unspeakable things for immortality.
nathan_f77|11 years ago
I would personally like to live for as long as possible. I have a lot to live for.
cymetica|11 years ago
pvaldes|11 years ago
unknown|11 years ago
[deleted]
cymetica|11 years ago
[deleted]