Hacker News Reader

Comment by topynate | Hacker News Reader

If the topic is tissue damage from sharp ice crystals, it's pretty handy to draw the distinction between cooling methods that cause that and ones that don't.

View on HN

Yes, that's the relevant distinction in fact. Cryonics are the former, not the latter. Multicellular cryonic suspension is an unsolved problem after roughly the blastocyst stage.

As of last year we're up to doing rat kidneys. They're "heavily" damaged but they recover within a few weeks. To be sure, there's a long way from that to near-perfectly preserving a human brain, let alone a whole body.

https://www.statnews.com/2023/06/21/cryogenic-organ-preserva...

Yes, that is a living rat-sized kidney. Not a dead human-sized brain. And on a pass-fail grade, I'm giving that experiment a fail. Promising, yes.

Cryopreservation of corpses is a scam designed to fleece rich people with an extraordinary fear of death. Some justify it to themselves as supporting research which might lead to effective corpsicles, but to support such research they could simply donate to it. Not waste their money on an elaborate and expensive embalming with no hope of salvation.

Scam implies intent and someone benefiting. These cryonics organizations are nonprofits run by members.

By that logic, computers are a dead end because Babbage's Difference Engine No. 1 never really worked properly... Or that space travel is impossible because a lot of early rockets blew up on the pad.

I don't understand this kind of pessimism at all.

It might work someday, maybe. But it won't work now. The corpsicles which currently exist are just as dead as if they were cremated. I understand, sort of, the psychology of people who lie to themselves about this, but that's all that's happening.

You don't know what future technological capability will be. Current Alcor and CI patients are preserved well enough that their bodies and brains could in theory be repaired by technology at the physical limits of possibility. The information is there.

You are saying that existing technology is unable to fix the issues of vitrification. That is correct, but irrelevant.

You don't know that because you don't know the physical limits of reanimation technology. In 2014, a human brain was vitrified with no ice crystallization or fracturing for the first time. Certainly, the first viable preservation will occur (if it has not already occurred) long before the first reanimation, and eventually discovering that we began to preserve people too soon would be much better than discovering that we began not soon enough. Even the primitively frozen might be retrievable centuries from now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com