Video From the Manhattan Beach Project Longevity Summit
Permalink | View Comments (4) | Post Comment | | Posted by Reason

I see that video interviews and presentations from the recent Manhattan Beach Project Longevity Summit are available on YouTube. A number of folk from the pro-longevity community who don't normally show up in interviews online are featured, so head on over to the Project channel and see what you think. A selection follows:

Manhattan Beach Project Defined

A conference of leading scientists, entrepreneurs, anti-aging doctors held in Manhattan Beach, California on November 13-15, 2009. The goal of the event was to create real time lines and real budgets designed to completely change the face of aging.

Dave Kekich: The Bridge to Longevity

If we can keep ourselves healthy for just another 15 to 20 years there will be new technologies that can actually reverse aging.

Ray Kurzweil Addresses the 2009 Longevity Conference

Famed inventor and futurist tell scientists gathered at the 2009 Longevity Conference that we are "very close to a tipping point in human history." According to his projections, in 15 years we will be adding more than one year every year to YOUR lifespan.

Aubrey de Grey: The Role of Mitochondria DNA in Aging

The noted biogerontologist discusses the effects of accumulative damage to mitochondria and the impact this has on cellular aging and senescence.

Dave Kekich: How Does Society Benefit From Extreme Life Extension

Maximum Life founder Dave Kekich answers the conventional objections people raised to increasing the human lifespan.

I should note that some of the videos linked above are the opening segments of multi-part presentations. The channel lists its contents, so you'll figure it out.

Comments

It will be interesting to see if that 15 years prediction from Kurzweil doesn't move as time goes on. For example, I think he's been saying 15 years for over a year, so it should be 14 years by now.

A few years from now, probably still 15 years.
Maybe 5 and 10 years from now he'll still be saying 15 years, just as De Grey has used the 25 years for at least 5 years now (should be down to 20).

Posted by: Jay at December 25, 2009 8:54 AM

Personally, I don't agree with Kurzweil's timeline for reasons relating to minimum times required for humans to create organizations - see:

https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2005/09/reading-the-sin.php

de Grey on the other hand has always said that the timeline for developing rejuvenation therapies starts when significant funding arrives. i.e. once a billion-dollar program is underway on SENS, burning about a hundred million a year. So working SENS technologies will continue to be ten years out (for robust mouse rejuvenation) or longer (for human applications) until we cross the fundraising barrier.

Posted by: Reason at December 25, 2009 9:34 AM

Reason,

I agree with most of the comments in your 2005 post. Additionally, I feel that Kurzweil seems to underestimate the length of time that it takes for society to adopt new technologies. Even assuming that the larger culture is supportive of a new tech (and that is often times not the case), that item takes longer to saturate the market than is posited in 'The Singualrity is Near.' The same scenario holds for more specialized tech. For instance, a lab won't necessarily utilize new technology as soon as it is available (or even several years after it becomes available), even if this tech would improve its research methods/processes. At the same time, even if the researcher(s) buy(s) the equipment, there is no guarantee he/she (they) will use it correctly.

As an aside, I think it is about time for Kurzweil to publish another book updating some of the info. in 'The Singularity is Near?'

Posted by: Anthony at December 25, 2009 10:26 AM

I think the follow up is actually planned as "The Singularity is Here," to be "written, as such things exist then" by uKurzweil (the prefix u being used to designated the uploaded, digital copy of a persona).

Posted by: robot makes music at December 25, 2009 6:32 PM
Post a comment; thoughtful, considered opinions are valued. Please note that comments incorporating ad hominem attacks, advertising, and other forms of inappropriate behavior are likely to be deleted.









Remember personal info?