The Men Who Want to Live Forever
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
This article drew me in because I'm obsessed with anti-aging tech, but to take something that isn't all evil, and twist it is horrible. I think the biggest issue is income inequality personally, --when the rich DO figure out immortality, it may only be accessible to the billionaire class at which point -- they're essentially giving everyone else a death sentence.
1. Pharmaceutical companies want people to take it.
2. Insurance companies would want humans to take it.
3. Once a drug is invented, if it is kept hidden or secret, the people who administer the drug would want it for their families. There would be whistle blowers, there would be leaks.
As soon as it is leaked labs in China or India or anywhere would reproduce it and longevity tourism would ensue.
You know, like healthcare, or trips to the moon.
People with a lot of money get access to things before people without a lot of money.
Even gene therapy, is primarily bounded by R&D and then delivery may or may not be expensive, I don’t know.
It would much more interesting if the focus was on the societal/inequality angle that it's billionaires (who, yes, are mostly men) who are seeking to extend their dominance by living longer.
Please don't post ideological flamebait to HN. The GP comment managed to stay on the ok side of the line. Your comment did not.
Fortunately reading articles isn’t necessary for a good discussion on Hackernews.
Food for thought is that life extension treatments once developed will ultimately be cheaper and safer than hospital care. So they'll be compulsory, in effect. Or rather everyone will continually face the question: more extension, or voluntary euthanasia? No more waiting around to die. Purpose, metaphysics, mental health all brought into sharp focus.
edit: guess I touched a nerve, but please have some respect. I wasn't being facetious, just so you know. I lost a newborn brother at age 5 and my father at age 11, so I've experienced death. I've grieved deeply. Yes there's tragedy in death. I can't and won't invalidate that. But there is so much more to death than tragedy. And more often than not, the tragedy is rooted in unfulfilled lives, not in death itself. I don't see how longer lifespans are going to magically cure the bigger problem of unfulfilling life habits being normalized, even enforced. There are too many people on this planet who haven't made peace with death, and who externalize their fear onto others. I believe this is the author's point. You downvote me without asking any questions? Call the author a luddite? I imagine you are someone who hasn't made peace with death and the forces of evolution. I urge you to face it from a fresh angle, to have courage and take a good look, it's not a monster unless you make it be.
And honestly, people who treated my father's death like a monster kinda traumatized me. They encouraged me to idolize my father in a way that distracted me from his wonderful, raw humanity, both in living and dying.
P.S. If anyone open minded wants an interesting perspective on death, check out the book "Living Your Dying" by Stanley Keleman.
I think a simple poll would find that practically no one feels they deserve to die.
I agree this is not what the author intends by the term, but your comment "no one feels they deserve to die" is too absolutist, at least in my experience.