|
Well then, Monkey, we can leave you to your death, and press on without you. I, on the other hand, think it's ludicrous to suppose that there won't be any interventions on aging by 2105, as you suppose.
I think people miss two key points when talking about the feasility of life extension.
First, looking at the progress of SENS and concluding that life extension is not going to happen based solely on its progress is a poor indicator. The economy is would together in every way. In order for life extension to occur, for example, we need fast computers. We need good laboratory equipment. We need excellent communications software. Heck, we even need faster cars and planes to make people more productive. Advances in almost any area of life indirectly benefit life extension research, so the amount of money spent directly on the research is important, but it's not the only consideration to the feasibility of this.
Second, everyone should contribute to the Mprize. But because the exponential nature of technological advance, the progress that can be made this entire year is a week's worth of progress in 2016. Thus, just because the Mprize hasn't reached two billion dollars yet isn't a cause for panic. Unfortuantely, some people will die as a result of the delay, and that's a bad thing. It may not be you, though, because money spent on this research tomorrow is worth more than money spent today.
Look at the human genome project: the first seven years of the project yielded just 1% progress! The last year yielded the vast majority of the 15-year project's results.
[Posted by: Steve at April 13, 2006 2:21 PM]
|
