Death provides an opportunity for change. Often in the form of upheaval to political structures but more frequently in opening up social opportunities.
Removing death from the equation introduces either: stagnation, if it is made available to everyone; or a new kind of inequality that I can't comprehend being accepted.
Immortality becoming a possibility is also an opportunity for changing our social structures. There's nothing wrong with Bezos or Gates living forever, as long as their social and financial dominance isn't also guaranteed to live forever.
> Removing death from the equation introduces either: stagnation, if it is made available to everyone
Stagnation follows from an assumption that neuroplasticity is zero. That is one of the problems that need solving for immortality anyway, but I don't see why it's unsolvable. If some technique rejuvenates at the cellular level, it could also work on neurons.
While that moment may provide an opportunity, my view is that a ossification will set in more broadly in the long term.
> Stagnation follows from an assumption that neuroplasticity is zero. That is one of the problems that need solving for immortality anyway, but I don't see why it's unsolvable. If some technique rejuvenates at the cellular level, it could also work on neurons.
Possessing the capability for change is not the same as possessing the desire to see that change through. Those with power seek to hold on to it. An extreme example would be that of dictatorships and monarchies. Death ultimately limits the harm those people can cause while also providing a moment of instability which may be seized to alter the system.
Unless practical immortality coincides with fundamental and extreme shifts in our society and economy, it'd be a catastrophe.
Phew, so lucky we got this alternative scenario where literally everyone dies.
Pretty sure this problem has been around since the dawn of civilization. It's not simple to keep money and power from concentrating in society
A proposal that makes this problem worse does not seem likely to make the opportunity easier to take advantage of.
Years spent observing a field or topic with a well-trained eye is incredibly valuable. But by the time you're an expert, you typically have at best 3 decades and often much less to practice before serious decline kicks in. It would be a very different world where the number of experts and veterans rose by an order of magnitude.
Also, as I've come to see with my own advancing years, humans are very good at forgetting history and its lessons. The best way to maintain historical awareness is to simply have people around who lived through it. The current historical moment is an illustration of this - the world is sliding toward large-scale war just as the last of those who saw ww2 with their own eyes are leaving the scene. I don't think that's a coincidence.
In our world, barring catastrophic collapse (which IMO is not at all unlikely within Bezos's lifespan), the latter seems almost certain.
Some new competitor will eventually crush MS and Amazon. To stay extremely rich forever, Bezos and Gates will have to also be great investors.
Then some other person like Musk comes with new ideas that blow even their massive fortunes out of the water.
Long term dominance in an eternal-life society is certainly not possible.
Take those things away through bad/ineffective government and you could very easily end up in a society where those in power use their power to stop others from innovating or accumulating any wealth.
Long lived institutions focused on consolidating and preserving their power can have a similar effect to long-lived people. The Catholic church's role in the Middle Ages, for example.
I’m not sure those are great examples of people clinging to power forever, considering they’re semi-retired / retired and neither were heavily involved in politics in the first place.
Just because most people with political power are old rich white men doesn’t mean all old rich white men run the world.
The desire to retire may have something to do with mortality.
> Just because most people with political power are old rich white men doesn’t mean all old rich white men run the world
It's hard to understand why you went in this direction. The parent comment didn't mention race or sex, and there are entire continents of people that ought to disprove your world view.
But what if Einstein had lived a few more decades?
https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/03/28/stories-that-should-...
Humans do okay with certain rates of change, but right now, the more nightmarish business is a problem for your great grandkids.
I think that's an unfortunate example: burning fossil fuels is a much bigger problem, and it is not even long-term (most of us will be around for the consequences). Still we do it virtually without planning at all.
I think we'd have to ban compound interest, somehow.