Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

1120 comments

now i can do this! (-1, Offtopic)

jaxdahl (227487) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988669)

this is my first post -- the first of first posts for the next 1000 years

Re:now i can do this! (1)

stupidfoo (836212) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988720)

No, sorry, this is most likely another hoax!

See only the Bible for answers. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988682)

A number of people in biblical times lived well into their 200s or 300s. This is well-documented in The Bible. 1000 years doesn't sound like so much of a stretch now.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (4, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988717)

Is there any documentary or archaeological evidence, outside of the Bible itself, to support this claim? I'm not trying to troll or anything, but before we use a single dubious source as a basis for determining what may or may not be scientifically feasible, we may want to look for more evidence.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988798)

Yeap. Also where is that stated in the bible?

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (3, Insightful)

mcg1969 (237263) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988828)

While I am certain that this post is going to invite many a troll, the Bible is not the only ancient text to document extended life spans. That's not to say they're not all blowing smoke, but it's not out of the question that some sort of significant cosmological or climatological shift might have contributed to shortening our natural lifespan.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (2, Insightful)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988915)

Not as far as I know.

For some reason, the Bible often seems at odds with the findings of archaeologists, historians, geologists and science in general.

In other news... (0, Troll)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988929)

George W Bush has been re-elected to his 225th term of office. Some doubleplus-ungood thoughtcriminals have alleged that there were irregularities in the electoral process, but they are being rounded up and taken to the Ministry of Love at this very moment.

I for one welcome our macavalian antediluvian overlords!!

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988740)

Ah the Bible.. one of my favorite science fiction stories.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988741)

This is well-documented in The Bible

Right. Also well documented in the Bible:
1. The World is Flat (see Jobe and the International Flat-Earth Society)
2. Men and Women have different numbers of ribs (count them... same number)
3. The Earth was completely covered with water (something every geologist disputes)
4. A women reproduced asexually (a feat claimed by a number of pregnant teenagers)

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (1)

mikael (484) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988829)

2. Men and Women have different numbers of ribs (count them... same number)

Actually, people can have different numbers of ribs. Some people actually have genetic mutations that give then extra rib bones at the shoulders.

"But Leroi wants to know about those differences; and his book is a celebration of the intrinsic interest of human diversity. After all, it turns out that on average each of us contains 300 potentially harmful mutations - and one in 10 of us has an extra rib. As he says, we are all mutants, but some of us are more mutant than others."

Source: Sunday Times review [armandleroi.com]

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (1)

Mysticalfruit (533341) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988902)

One of my co-workers has an instance of inbreeding in his family and due to this, he has extra teeth and his son has extra ribs.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (1)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988790)

Actually, some guy was talk to me about this. He was saying something about how the earth wasn't developed and had no protection from UV for some obscure reason, so that bacteria and virii would be eliminated naturally.

I really didn't feel like arguing with him, so I just listened to his theory. He failed to take into account the other reasons why people die, such as the degradation of our genetic code that occurs over multiple generations of cell division

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (1)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988858)

The oldest guy in the bible was Methusela (i think it's spelled like that) and he was like 900. Later on, God declared that man's years would be somewhere around 120. So even if it did happen once that people lived to be close to 1000, if you believe the Bible, you'll believe that it won't happen again.

Re:See only the Bible for answers. (4, Interesting)

ellem (147712) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988877)

what you need to do is read Asimov's Bible History and you'll understand WHY people are said to live hundreds of years.

Short answer: Not people, names.

I know what his plan is! (2, Funny)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988684)

My mommy told me the secret....eat your veggies!

Re:I know what his plan is! (1)

Haydn Fenton (752330) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988795)

Either way, I wonder how helpful this will really be, and what does 'aging' include? I mean, will we still get senile, or is it just our bodies that stay young, and how many bodily 'disfunctions' (for lack of a better word) are caused by the brain deteriating (sp?)?
Still.. Wow. This is a damn cool story, and I for one welcome our new millenia-old-people.
Oh, and one more thing.. Population disaster; rising ocean levels, increasing population.. where are we all going to fit? Personally, I recommend we spend a great deal of money guiling giant plexiglass movable undersea bubbles that we can all live in, some with their own seas and inslands inside them.. but that's another story..

I hope the life is good... (1, Insightful)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988686)

I personally would rather live 50 good, full years, and die gracefully, than live 1000 years dependent on all sorts of pills and not really living life.

Re:I hope the life is good... (2, Insightful)

RatBastard (949) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988778)

As someone who has already put 40 full years behind him, I'd liek to see another 960, thank you very much.

Re:I hope the life is good... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988825)

Plenty of people are already living on pills, and they seem happy enough... It doesn't make your life miserable. If you needed crutches to walk, would you want to stop walking?

Re:I hope the life is good... (5, Insightful)

Swamii (594522) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988839)

I personally would rather live 50 good, full years, and die gracefully, than live 1000 years dependent on all sorts of pills and not really living life.

$20 says Dr. Reducto will change his mind at 49. Any takers?

Re:I hope the life is good... (1)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988908)

Well, I am going to bet that a large part ofmy position is because I am an able-bodied 18 year old male, but I see older people with all their problems and I can't stand the thought of relying on pills to keep me alive.

Also, I don't mean that I would want to just live for 50 years and die, I meant that I would prefer to live a full life and then die, rather than dragging on with the aid of pills/random therapy. However, the way they explain this, ti would seem as it would slow down the aging process as a whole.

Re:I hope the life is good... (1)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988901)

If you get extra years and aren't "really living life", isn't that kind of your own fault, not the pills?

In Korea... (2, Funny)

Ming_Mecca (816256) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988688)

Only Old People... Oh, wait.

In England, (0, Offtopic)

Jucius Maximus (229128) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988689)

dying is only for... Wait, I guess this meme is dead now. Good riddance.

Not a good idea (2, Insightful)

truz24 (800762) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988690)

There is a reason for people dying when they do. There would be major overpopulation if people were to live that long...

Re:Not a good idea (1)

PoopJuggler (688445) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988731)

One of the side effects of the treatment is shriveled genitals, so I don't think it will be a problem.

Re:Not a good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988743)

We've got significant overpopulation problems now, without this.

Re:Not a good idea (1)

eln (21727) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988774)

The population of the Earth has continued to grow at an astonishing rate throughout human history, regardless of age expectancy. The rate may increase a little more, but overpopulation in general is inevitable regardless of age expectancy. In cultures where age expectancy is low and infant mortality is high, having as many children as possible is encouraged. This is not a coincidence.

The human animal, like all animals, seeks to propagate itself on an instinctual level. The fact that we happen to be so damn good at it is why overpopulation has occurred and will continue to occur, regardless of other factors, short of total extinction.

not to sound all luddite but... (1)

ed.han (444783) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988834)

just b/c we can, should we?

let's say for the sake of argument it's actually possible. everybody would want immortality: it's been the dream of most of humanity for a long, long time. that all makes sense.

so how would you go about seeing who gets it, and when? there's wars going on b/c of contention over who owned a stretch of land first over the course of more than a few centuries. what kind of chaos and violence would this bring?

but even beyond that: a world in which nobody dies of old age for centuries? if you think that overpopulation's a problem now, we could very easily be headed towards a soylent green kinda world if we don't have natural limits on lifespans.

ed

Re:Not a good idea (5, Insightful)

Saige (53303) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988849)

There is a reason for people not flying.

There is a reason for people not being able to see well.

There is a reason people can't communicate with each other over long distances.

Just because something has been a certain way, doesn't mean it's SUPPOSED to be that way. Sometimes, things just are the way they are. That is, until they change.

Should the technology become available, you don't have to extend your life. You can live without all this fancy technology. BTW - you don't go to the hospital and stuff, do you? There is a reason for people dying from diseases, after all, and curing them would be unnatural and wrong.

Re:Not a good idea (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988867)

Trouble with Lichen is a very good book written by John Wyndham covering the social effects of the development of a treatment for ageing. Well worth the read. Someone else (I can't remember who) suggested that the price of immortality should be sterilisation (and this should only be available for people who have not already had children). While this may solve the problem (as long as the birth rate amongst the mortal population remains relatively constant), I imagine that the growing differences between mortal an immortal populations would quickly become insurmountable.

I'd do it in a heartbeat. (0)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988891)

There is a reason for people dying when they do. There would be major overpopulation if people were to live that long...

Use a condom.

Take the pill.

There are preventative measures, if you're intelligent enough to use them and not to subscribe to toxic religions that ban them (and other forms of medicine ... usually for women).

Other people's stupidity, lack of control, or religion (the third I suppose implies the first) is no reason I shouldn't live to be 1000, or 10e29 for that matter.

Would I want to? (1)

Rosyna (80334) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988691)

I'm not sure I'd want to live to be 1000. Bad enough to see the fall of the Commonwealth but to actually see the Abyss take over. I just don't think I could take it.

Yeah, I love Trance. Wanna fight about it?

Re:Would I want to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988869)

we would all live on sefra... wow it would suck

Looks like thats two times.... (5, Funny)

Aceto3for5 (806224) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988707)

... in my lifetime that I can see the Red Sox win the world series!

If you can say it, I can say it. (1)

DA_MAN_DA_MYTH (182037) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988895)

... in my lifetime that I can see the Red Sox win the world series!

and live to see the release of Duke Nukem Forever, and maybe play it while we are young!

Yah but.. (3, Insightful)

A5un (586681) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988709)

Can we have eternal youth as well?

Re:Yah but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988818)

Yes. RTFA!

Re:Yah but.. (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988919)

Cancer is your genes' way of saying you've hung around too long.

I shudder to think of the dental problems the first two hundred year old has.

Re:Yah but.. (2, Insightful)

Saige (53303) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988920)

Of course. Aging is the process of the body breaking down, and if they cure aging, it's going to mean that your body stays in it's prime for a not longer. It doesn't mean we're going to spend 1000 years getting more and more frail - because people COULDN'T live 1000 years doing so, the body would fall apart completely before then.

I don't see why everyone assumes that extending lifespans by huge amounts would result in extending just the tail end over that time. Damn Tithonus Syndrome. [everything2.org]

First Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988710)

If I live to be 1000 the technology behind underpants would finally be out of date.

There goes my retirement! (5, Funny)

Duncan3 (10537) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988719)

How long until they raise the retirement age to 980?

When 900 years old you reach, (3, Funny)

Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988894)

Look as good you will not, hmmm.

Yeah, because the old way just wasn't effective... (4, Insightful)

Skyshadow (508) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988721)

I wouldn't want to live to be 1000. That last century you spend in a nursing home probably would Suck with a capital "S".

Seriously, given the likelyhood of an accident getting you, imagine the sort of life people would have to live to average living to 1000. Even if you could offer people a constant youthful physique and extreme longevity, how many of us are really going to make it to even 200? Unless you live your entire life underground in a room with little windows, never venturing forth into the world, something's going to get you. While this means that a huge number of /.'ers are relatively safe, the rest of us are still going to get ourselves killed going over the handlebar on our bikes or crashing our cars or walking in front of a bus or hitting trees skiing or etc.

Aside from that, try to imagine the social, scientific and political stagnation that would occur from having old people not dying. Try to picture the economic devestation among young people (you think following the boomers sucks...), the lock-in of power among a few Very Oldsters... If people do start living to 1000, I think our real duty would be to start hunting them.

Re:Yeah, because the old way just wasn't effective (1)

TykeClone (668449) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988796)

If people do start living to 1000, I think our real duty would be to start hunting them.

What kind of sport would that be - they move slowly and don't hide well. That would kind of be like hunting cattle - in a feed yard.

So, death is a good idea (3, Insightful)

Julian Morrison (5575) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988799)

To demonstrate this, please commit suicide.

Well, isn't that what you're asking everyone else to do, by wilfully forgoing life-extension technology?

Re:Yeah, because the old way just wasn't effective (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988903)

Accident probability is Poisson Distributed. Poisson distributions have no memory. Your probability of being in an accident doesn't increase with time. Strange, but true.

Flash! Slashdotters guaranteed to reach 1000! (1)

Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988932)

Unless you live your entire life underground in a room with little windows, never venturing forth into the world

So your saying the majority of people here will reach a thousand. wooohoo!

What would the Beatles think of this? (5, Funny)

gatekeep (122108) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988725)

Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm 6-0-4?

Re:What would the Beatles think of this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988870)

Brought tears to my eyes, in a good way.

In Korea... (-1)

eldalonde (772750) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988728)

Will old people still be using email in Korea when they're 1000 years old?

What will happen... (4, Insightful)

CommanderData (782739) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988732)

...when this technology is developed? Will it be shared freely with every person on the planet, or will you have to be one of the wealthy elite of a first-world-nation in order to be immortal? If the treatment is universally shared, what will be done about overpopulation of the planet? With birthrates where they are now, and no one dying of old age we'll need to move billions of people into space.

announcement (0, Offtopic)

FrogAlarmClock (820108) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988745)

Open source is a giant ZIonist conspiracy. mod up plz

Actually... (1)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988747)

We can't... only he can.

Remember, there can be only one.

We'll get there. (1)

jericho4.0 (565125) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988748)

The 'opposing view' rightly cautions against false prophets and the seductive lure of imortality, but doesn't acknowledge that we know about a billion times more about aging than we did even 50 years ago.

I personally am not expecting to live to a 1000, but I'm sure that in a few generations people will be living much longer.

haha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988750)

"The right to choose to live or to die is the most fundamental right there is" Ha ha

Lame Rebuttle (1)

avandesande (143899) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988753)

I thought the rebuttle was pretty lame... several stories of past interest in immortality that failed...
I am sure mankind has thought about flight for just as long, but in 50 years we went from flying a couuple hundred yards to the SR-71.

Re:Lame Rebuttle (1)

Big_Breaker (190457) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988931)

I good analogy on flight. For many others we can look at the sketch books of Da Vinci. Lots of modern technology used to be pure fantasy.

What I wonder is... (1)

Samurai Cat! (15315) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988755)

...with that beard, how does that guy do any lab work? Wouldn't his hair get in *everything*? :P

I got no problem with it.. (1)

Slime-dogg (120473) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988756)

All I have to do is get my billions by the age of 40. Then I have 960 years of excellent retirement to look forward to.

A Long Damn Time (3, Interesting)

teiresias (101481) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988760)

As much as I never want to die, and I really really don't, living to a 1000 years old seems a tad bit excessive. After awhile, the risk of being alive is diminished and we no longer have a rush to do things. With a deadline of a 1000 years (more than ten times the above average we have now), it gives new meaning to putting stuff off till tommorow. Much of the excitement that makes life so worth living will be lost.

And I suppose when we start having people living till 1000, they'll come out with treatments to help you live to 10,000. etc etc etc.

What I'd really like to know is if the treatment will be a simple once a day pill or a three hour long invasive therapy I have to go through every morning (much like showering).

Re:A Long Damn Time (1)

eln (21727) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988859)

Sure, some people would use the extra time to procrastinate, but I think over time we would evolve into a far more contemplative species. Real wisdom may be gained as we take more time to contemplate decisions and philosophies, without the overwhelming pressure to get all we can before we die. On the whole, it just may make us into a more peaceful, wise, and prosperous society.

But that's just the idealist in me talking. Your scenario is probably more likely, the human animal being what it is.

Re:A Long Damn Time (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988881)

a three hour long invasive therapy I have to go through every morning (much like showering).

Damn... what kind of shower are you taking?

Re:A Long Damn Time (1)

gatekeep (122108) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988882)

What I'd really like to know is if the treatment will be a simple once a day pill or a three hour long invasive therapy I have to go through every morning (much like showering).


If showering takes you three hours, you must be really caked in filth!

This may not be a good idea (2, Insightful)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988763)

I didn't read the article, of course, but would you really want to be slaving away for so long, feeding the upper class?
Or how many losses could you cope with? Imagine that your significant other dies in a crash, 50 years later your child is killed, and another one commits suicide? And then your second significant other leaves you.
I dunno, maybe I'm too pessimistic, but it's not all rosy if everyone can live that long...

And what happens if this does come true? (1)

LordPhantom (763327) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988767)

What happens if someday, somehow scientists are able to make people live 1000+ years?

On it's face it's a good thing, but can/will our food supply chain support that? What would the sociological impacts be?

Things to do.. (1)

rf0 (159958) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988768)

So you live to be 1000 or whatever but surely after a couple of hunderd years you would get bored and would feel that you've seen everything. SO what do you do then?

Of course space travel might be possible then but you would then be stuck on a ship for a couple hundered years getting bored there instead

Rus

Re:Things to do.. (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988846)

"So you live to be 1000 or whatever but surely after a couple of hunderd years you would get bored and would feel that you've seen everything"

Maybe you would. Personally I could easily find things to keep me occupied for 10,000 years, let alone 1000.

Heck, just posting on Slashdot could probably fill up a couple of thousand...

S Jay Olshansky PhD is a tard. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988776)

It's called medicine, man! It ain't witchcraft.

Prior Art (1)

scotay (195240) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988784)

I think Mel Brooks has this act patented.

And where exactly ... (2, Insightful)

merdaccia (695940) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988785)

does he plan to put 50 billion people?

Re:And where exactly ... (4, Funny)

east coast (590680) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988820)

[where] does he plan to put 50 billion people?

Never seen The Matrix have you?

I'm young and my back hurts already! (1)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988789)

How much will it hurt 900 years from now? I don't even want to know.

Yeah, live to be 1000, but... (1)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988802)

he doesn't mention anything about remaining youthful. I don't think I'd want to be 1000, cuz after 50 years things get a little wrinkly, saggy, floppy, and don't work so well. At the very least, it wouldn't be very pleasing to the eye to see a bunch of 500 year old people walking around.

Quote, "When 900 years old you reach, look as good, you will not."

Re:Yeah, live to be 1000, but... (1)

Big_Breaker (190457) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988857)

It mentions being youthful at lest four times. Did you RTFA? I don't think so....

Re:Yeah, live to be 1000, but... (1)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988934)

I RTFFTPTIS! (I Read the First F***ing Two Paragraphs Then I Stopped!)

I don't think it's possible (1)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988803)

Regardless of any advances in gene therapy, organ recreation, etc., I think there will be a point where your body systems get too old to work together properly, and I think that age is well before 1000.

Think of it like a building. You can have bricks replacing themselves, but at some point you need to do a wholescale replacement of the wall because it's not aligned, and then we're getting into expensive surgery.

Some organs, like kidneys, lend themselves to remove and replace, but other systems are intertwined with other systems. I'm not sure that the body can maintain that indefinately. The body grows into an adult form, and then shrinks and dies. Even if you have cells maintaining themselves, the tissual structure might get out of control over time. Some tissues and orgrans can be economically replaced, others can't.

social security (1)

drunkasian (734665) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988805)

good news for the u.s. gov't... they can just raise the retirement age and won't have to worry about running out of social security for another thousand years or so

Future lamers (5, Funny)

JohnGrahamCumming (684871) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988809)

I surely hope so... then my 6 digit /. ID will look so cool to all those 48 digit l4mers who just signed up.

That's right script kiddie: I'm a top 1,000,000 /. member so bite me.

John.

Spam (1)

Basehart (633304) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988816)

Another 960 years of Spam! I don't think I could handle that!

Obligatory Steven Wright quote (1)

General Alcazar (726259) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988819)

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good."

born-again loser (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988822)

Olshansky is just bitter for failing to invest in stemcell startups, while profiting from dissing extropians like Kurzweil in his book.

Live to 1000 + colonization of space = better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988831)

If we are all going to be able to live to be 1000, colonization of space needs to be something we can easily do. The problem with living that long (aside from being bored with life, although let's assume that those willing to live that long are cool with it) is overpopulation. Spreading to other planets would fix that quite easily.

Good (1)

espenss (409753) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988836)

The elfs are finally revealing their secrets.

Another millenium or so to retire (weeeeeeee) (1)

hodet (620484) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988852)

Hope I'm not spending all my time patching Windows 3000 when the time comes. That would be sad. Kill me! Please........kill me!!!!!

Wishful and muddled thinking (1)

wurp (51446) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988854)

So this guy says the person to live to 1000 years old might already be 60... and about how old does he look in the picture? It sounds a lot like the needs instead of the fact dictating the expectation.

Secondly, this is apparently a major field of interest for this fellow, but he has basic facts that are way off...

From the article:
"If you are a reasonably risk-aware teenager today in an affluent, non-violent neighbourhood, you have a risk of dying in the next year of well under one in 1,000, which means that if you stayed that way forever you would have a 50/50 chance of living to over 1,000."

Uh, no, that's not at all what it means. If you have a .001 chance of dying each year, that means you have a .999 chance of living, and over 50 years you have a .999 ^ 50 = about .95 chance of living. 95% is very different from 50%.

In fact, I agree with his philosophy that life extension is a soluble problem, and that it is a very good thing. However, he's sure as heck not the spokesman I would choose unless he's being misquoted badly.

Just think ... (1)

savi (142689) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988863)

... how much karma you could accrue on slashdot!

Though I must say, if I lived 1000 years, I would probably just end up fading into the West (Hawaii or there abouts).

A population that old? (5, Insightful)

Washizu (220337) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988871)

Think of the Matlock ratings!

that's not much (2, Funny)

naoursla (99850) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988873)

Why that's only 8 years old when written in decimal.

Obligatory quote (1)

Swamii (594522) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988878)

In Communist Korea, only old people die.

Good News / Bad News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988896)

The Good News: You'll live to be 1,000 years old

The Bad News: For the last 925 years, you'll have no bowel control.

Appeasing religious devotees (1)

BlueEar (550461) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988897)

It always strikes me as odd that many articles that talk about extending our lives, enhancing our intelligence, etc., have one section devoted to appeasing religious groups. At the end of his article Dr Aubrey de Grey includes the "Playing God?" section. Isn't it strange that a betterment of human kind must be safeguarded against religious arguments? Why isn't James Watson's argument "if we could build a better human, why shouldn't we" sufficient. Is this god really so jealous of us living longer, knowing more, having fewer diseases?

Whats the point?? (1)

bluenote39 (766441) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988899)

you still wont get laid.

bad idea. (1)

Morph233 (744764) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988905)

over population.... I can see it now, I haven't had any kids in the last 100 years, i think it's time for 2 or 3 (times that by 700-1000 year and you get 15-30 kids per 2 people)

What about all those dumb people who we all have been waiting to die because they have been using up our precious oxygen :)

or worse 500 years from now you'd be one of those people (if the planet still exists)

1000 years you say? (1)

Icarus1919 (802533) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988913)

Yeah, that's great an all, but will my dick still work at that point? If not, it's not worth it.

Cool (1)

vinukr (796210) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988914)

Oh.. cool!! I dont have to get married at 30 ... I can stay bachelor till i am 950.. :) ... That does releive loads of tension... But, will i be able to do "it" after marriage??

Questions (1)

retro128 (318602) | more than 9 years ago | (#10988925)

It might be a good idea to wait until we are able to colonize other planets before we start extending life spans to 1000 years. With the overcrowding that would ensue, it would be become necessary to cull the herd anyway. Then what's the point?

And other thing is, is stopping cellular damage as time goes on going to translate into longer lifespans? The body might be able to repair itself more effectively, but what would a person look like after 1,000 years of life? Would the quality of life even make it worth living? Who would want to live to be 1,000, anyway?

"SENS" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10988928)

SENS (Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence)

It's amazing how so many organization names just happen to translate into catchy, meaningful acronyms, eh? We should start an organization for Monitoring Organization Names That Also have Not-so-bad Acronyms (MONTANA).
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...