Tech Based Youthful Immortality

[politas]

Not really. You're not factoring all the possibilities... but as you do not know all the possibilities, that would be a bit difficult to do.

Either way, I personally would not want to be cryogenically frozen. But I see that in the future, there is the distant possibility that they might need someone from today... even if just because they need new DNA in their bloodstreams, or they need a genius mind of today (and who knows? Maybe what seems to us like some "some rich idiot" that got himself cryogenically frozen could be the genius of tomorrow... after all, our standards today might not stand the test of time to the future).

Quite frankly, there are many unknowns to the future.

Lets just say that all available evidence points towards my conclusion. Other things are possible, but I'm not one to place a lot of faith in things that are possible but for which there is no evidence.

 

[Dave1001]

Lets just say that all available evidence points towards my conclusion. Other things are possible, but I'm not one to place a lot of faith in things that are possible but for which there is no evidence.

I think it's highly contestible that all available evidence point to your conclusion. If anything, all available evidence points to the futility of making predictions this specific about decisions that will be made hundreds of years in the future. But if in the future civil contract law is still honored, and Alcor Foundation and other cryogenic companies' finances are prudently managed, I think cryogenically preserved people will have as good a shot at having their estate wishes being legally honored as are the multigenerational trusts written for deceased people hundreds of years in the past.

It's an interesting question: what the oldest/longest running trust that is still being legally honored?

 

[Morrigan]

I have only skimmed the thread, so apologies if this has been brought up before, but I am reminded of the case of the 12-year-old girl who never aged (link, video). Though it's not well known if she doesn't age, or doesn't grow. I wonder if they would pick some of her cells for lab analysis? Surely they could see an anomaly in there. But maybe they already tried that and found nothing conclusive...

I am also reminded of the SENS concept. It seems interesting at first, but it seems to have been debunked as pseudoscience by Estep et al. (pdf). But de Grey (the SENS founder) offered a rebuttal, which had its counter-rebuttal, and so on. I admit that much of the science talk goes well over my head, so the debate is difficult to follow.
Interestingly, the SENS guy's organisation, Methuselah Foundation, along with Technology Review, offered a $20K prize (sounds familiar?) for anyone who could successfully demonstrate that SENS is "so wrong it is unworhy of debate". Three submissions were made to be examined by a panel of judges (who is, strangely, not made up of expert gerontologists and biologists...). They were eventually rejected, but Techonology Review awarded their $10K half to Estep et al. for "careful scholarship". Go figure?

 

[politas]

I think it's highly contestible that all available evidence point to your conclusion. If anything, all available evidence points to the futility of making predictions this specific about decisions that will be made hundreds of years in the future. But if in the future civil contract law is still honored, and Alcor Foundation and other cryogenic companies' finances are prudently managed, I think cryogenically preserved people will have as good a shot at having their estate wishes being legally honored as are the multigenerational trusts written for deceased people hundreds of years in the past.

Those trusts usually have living benefactors, though, who are motivated to ensure that the requirements of the trust are followed correctly. When the only benefactors of a trust are a legally dead person and a computer program that faces possible termination, what's going to make the lawyers give up their control of a big swag of investment funds from which they draw a regular income?

Call me a cynic if you want, but I can see lawyers being mighty "careful" about the possibility of reviving a corpsicle before they can be "properly cared for".

 

[Dave1001]

Those trusts usually have living benefactors, though, who are motivated to ensure that the requirements of the trust are followed correctly.

They often don't, though. Not infrequently, the thing that benefits may seem ridiculous to the rest of the world except the person who left the resources. But if such trusts persist for hundreds of years, the odds for cryogenically preserved folks who left similar legal protections for themselves I think would be about as good.

 

[Lonewulf]

They often don't, though. Not infrequently, the thing that benefits may seem ridiculous to the rest of the world except the person who left the resources. But if such trusts persist for hundreds of years, the odds for cryogenically preserved folks who left similar legal protections for themselves I think would be about as good.

Which is still assuming that they can ever be "resurrected" eventually, though. The question is, what if they can't? How long should they stay preserved, and if more people want to be cryogenically preserved, how long should they be allowed to? This is a ton of resources you might eventually be spending.

Of course, I guess a similar argument can be made for graves in general. How much land will we eventually be using to bury the generation of 6 billion people, assuming there isn't a substantial number that want to be cremated? And even with such an assumption, eventually 6 billion people *would* be buried, just from further generations...

And in the case of burial, there's no distant idea of "Oh, we'll just defrost 'em in the future". It's more like, "We'll just stick 'im in the ground and let the worms have him".

 

[politas]

Of course, I guess a similar argument can be made for graves in general. How much land will we eventually be using to bury the generation of 6 billion people, assuming there isn't a substantial number that want to be cremated? And even with such an assumption, eventually 6 billion people *would* be buried, just from further generations...

You don't actually purchase a gravesite, you just lease it for a certain period of time. Graves are re-used. Not as frequently as they used to be, but they still aren't permanent things. In medieval Europe, people were only buried for a fairly short period, enough for their bodies to become just bones. They were then dug up and the bones placed in ossaries, where everybodies' bones got mingled together.

Note that scene in Hamlet "Alas, poor Yorrick...". The gravediggers are exhuming Yorrick's bones in order to make a new grave.

 

[politas]

They often don't, though. Not infrequently, the thing that benefits may seem ridiculous to the rest of the world except the person who left the resources. But if such trusts persist for hundreds of years, the odds for cryogenically preserved folks who left similar legal protections for themselves I think would be about as good.

But the lawyers maintaining such a trust continue to draw a stipend from the trust as long as that trust is maintained. The lawyers have a motivation to keep it going.

You're suggesting a law firm receives stipends to maintain a trust, and the trust says that when medical technology has sufficiently advanced to make safe resurrection of a particular person possible, the person will be revived, and the contents of the trust will be given to that person, ending the trust management (and therefore the firm's ongoing stipends).

Again, call me cynical, but I think the law firm is going to be extremely conservative in their estimation of the capabilities of medical technology.

 

[Lonewulf]

You don't actually purchase a gravesite, you just lease it for a certain period of time. Graves are re-used. Not as frequently as they used to be, but they still aren't permanent things. In medieval Europe, people were only buried for a fairly short period, enough for their bodies to become just bones. They were then dug up and the bones placed in ossaries, where everybodies' bones got mingled together.

Note that scene in Hamlet "Alas, poor Yorrick...". The gravediggers are exhuming Yorrick's bones in order to make a new grave.

How long is the lease for? Or rather, how long until someone's body becomes bones? Because I know that there have been gravestones up for quite a while... and if someone leased your gravesite, then they'd need a new gravestone, right?

 

[politas]

How long is the lease for? Or rather, how long until someone's body becomes bones? Because I know that there have been gravestones up for quite a while... and if someone leased your gravesite, then they'd need a new gravestone, right?

Depends on the place. The Canberra Cemetary has, from memory, 50-year leases, which can be extended a further fifty years when they expire (if there is anyone alive who still cares to extend it.) Less heavily utilised cemetaries often have no set policy; so they'll have to work something out when they fill up.

The time for a body to become bones depends highly on the type of soil and casket they are buried in. The modern idea of hermetically sealed boxes and trying to stave off decay as long as possible is pretty recent, really. Gravediggers used to add chemicals to speed up the process.

 

[AWPrime]

But there are also some bodies that refuse to rot.....


Many gravediggers still find whole bodies when they were expecting bones.

 

[politas]

But there are also some bodies that refuse to rot.....


Many gravediggers still find whole bodies when they were expecting bones.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Maybe they don't taste good to worms?

 

[Dave1001]

But the lawyers maintaining such a trust continue to draw a stipend from the trust as long as that trust is maintained. The lawyers have a motivation to keep it going.

You're suggesting a law firm receives stipends to maintain a trust, and the trust says that when medical technology has sufficiently advanced to make safe resurrection of a particular person possible, the person will be revived, and the contents of the trust will be given to that person, ending the trust management (and therefore the firm's ongoing stipends).

Again, call me cynical, but I think the law firm is going to be extremely conservative in their estimation of the capabilities of medical technology.

These sort of incentive problems exist for lots trust missions besides maintaining and reviving cryogenically frozen people. I think it can be managed as successfully for cryogenically preserved people as it is for these other trust missions that face similar incentive problems.

 

[politas]

These sort of incentive problems exist for lots trust missions besides maintaining and reviving cryogenically frozen people. I think it can be managed as successfully for cryogenically preserved people as it is for these other trust missions that face similar incentive problems.

Can you give a hypothetical example? I can't think of anything with similar issues. Maybe a "sword-in-the-stone" sort of trust that says "look after this money until you find someone who matches these criteria, then give them all the money."

In such an example, I would expect the postulated firm to be rather lax in their search for someone to meet the criteria, or if the funds for the search are part of their income from the fund, then they would search extremely widely, but be very precise about whether someone meets the criteria.

 

[Dave1001]

Can you give a hypothetical example? I can't think of anything with similar issues. Maybe a "sword-in-the-stone" sort of trust that says "look after this money until you find someone who matches these criteria, then give them all the money."

In such an example, I would expect the postulated firm to be rather lax in their search for someone to meet the criteria, or if the funds for the search are part of their income from the fund, then they would search extremely widely, but be very precise about whether someone meets the criteria.

There are many of them. Because trusts have been made for pretty much anything you can think of, and our anglo legal system is very generous in protecting their legality.

An example might be a trust to take care of a relative in a coma until it's established that they're medically brain dead, at such point all the money will go to the Roman Catholic Church. In theory the executor law firm may have an incentive to keep this relative on life support Terry Schiavo style forever. In practice the law firm's reputation as a steward of of people's finances after their die would suffer, so a law firm would be unlikely to forsake significant future business to keep control of one particular person's post-mortem assets.

Also, the Roman Catholic Church is counter-vested and might fight such a law firm in court. Similarly, one could create an incentive structure by promising a payment to a different law firm or company who successfully gets you revived in the future. They only get payment when you're successfully revived. Now, like the Roman Catholic Church, there's an existing, active party, who's differently vested than the executor-law firm.

 

[politas]

Similarly, one could create an incentive structure by promising a payment to a different law firm or company who successfully gets you revived in the future. They only get payment when you're successfully revived. Now, like the Roman Catholic Church, there's an existing, active party, who's differently vested than the executor-law firm.

That could work, I suppose. I still reckon I'd rather spend my money than tie it up freezing myself. I'll enjoy the time I have, and when I die, I die. No major problem.

 

[Dave1001]

That could work, I suppose. I still reckon I'd rather spend my money than tie it up freezing myself. I'll enjoy the time I have, and when I die, I die. No major problem.

And I'd defend you're right to do that ... but not with my life of course.

 

[politas]

And I'd defend you're right to do that ... but not with my life of course.

And in return, I defend your right to get yourself frozen and sign a fortune over to some lawyers in the faint hope that one day you might possibly experience a continuation of your present consciousness.

Just because I think something is idiotic, doesn't mean people shouldn't be able to do it.

 

[Lonewulf]

There we go. Now we're all agreeable idiots.