• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

New Slogan & Homepage Paragraph


  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

#1 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 12:47 AM


Due to excellent creativity from ImmInst Director, Harold Brenner, the homepage has undergone a number of changes. In line with this progress, this topic will be devoted to a hashing out of preferred new slogan and homepage paragraph.

Current homepage paragraph:

Life extension may seem far-fetched to many, but it's not a fantasy. Driven by a convergence of numerous technological advancements, including Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Cryonics and Nanotechnology, progress in life extension has already started. To advance global awareness, the Immortality Institute hosts an online forum, publishes books, produces films and sponsors conferences.

Current ImmInst slogan: For Infinite Lifespans

#2 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 12:54 AM

I've come to like "for open-ended lifespans" (picking this up from Duke's reply) better than "infinite". But I'm not married to it.

#3 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 06 July 2006 - 12:58 AM

what about "For Extended Lifespans"

#4 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:02 AM

hmm... interesting, but not sure...

#5 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:11 AM

I think "For Infinite Lifespans" is an excellent slogan. Thanks to Aubrey, the possibility has been all over the news for the past two years, so people are familiar with it and anyone who believes in science does take it somewhat seriously. We are already known as the Immortality Institute, and this will not change - so why not go the full mile, and say we're for infinite lifespans? (Which we quite obviously are.)

People see this stuff about life extension on the news, and hear about living 500 or whatever years. We're taking it "slightly" beyond that, and calling the human being a house that can stay up forever as long as it is constantly remodeled. (Analogy by Aubrey, of course.) When we say "infinite lifespans", people know what we're talking about, and it's not bullshit.

On the point regarding mention of the word "immortality", I'm allied with Mind and against the 3DRealms CEO (sorry, couldn't find your name after a couple minutes of searching). Marketing experience is definitely relevant with this, but instead of thinking about "Joe Blow" we need to be thinking about "Joe Science" - that is, the 10% of people out there that are non-retarded enough to realize that the human body is just a machine, open to reengineering just like every chunk of matter. Forget the people you talk to in your daily life. Most of them simply don't read, and we aren't going to convince them until we "inject" their sons and daughters with "immortality serum" and their aging process is obviously halted.

When Bruce was brainstorming names for the organization, I was against the name "Immortality Institute", but in retrospect, I think it was a great idea. We are #1 for the search term "immortality", even though our Alexa ranking could use improvement, traffic is relatively good. (Right? imminst.org/stats looks broken. I hope we are getting 100K+/month or we need to launch new marketing campaigns ASAP.)

I think the homepage paragraph is adequate, but could be improved through small changes. It's important to reference the potential approaches to this engineering challenge - Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Cryonics and Nanotechnology. Leave any of these out, and we're missing something essential. Perhaps the order should be changed, to accommodate popular opinion: Biotechnology, Nanotechnology, Cryonics, and Artificial Intelligence.

#6 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:22 AM

MA

I think "For Infinite Lifespans" is an excellent slogan.  Thanks to Aubrey, the possibility has been all over the news for the past two years, so people *are* familiar with it and anyone who believes in science *does* take it somewhat seriously.  We are already known as the Immortality Institute, and this will not change - so why not go the full mile, and say we're for infinite lifespans?  (Which we quite obviously are.)


The problem I have with the word *infinite* is that it is inaccurate. This universe had already been around for 13.2 billion years before any of us came onto the scene, so it is clearly doubtful that an infinite life span is possible, even in principle. Of course, we could play with how we define *infinity* (such as open ended, extended, etc), but why allow for the confusion in defining our terms if we could instead just as easily be more accurate in our phraseology?

Marketing experience is definitely relevant with this, but instead of thinking about "Joe Blow" we need to be thinking about "Joe Science" - that is, the 10% of people out there that are non-retarded enough to realize that the human body is just a machine, open to reengineering just like every chunk of matter.  Forget the people you talk to in your daily life.  Most of them simply don't read, and we aren't going to convince them until we "inject" their sons and daughters with "immortality serum" and their aging process is obviously halted.


Agreed. [thumb]

#7 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:31 AM

MA
The problem I have with the word *infinite* is that it is inaccurate.  This universe had already been around for 13.2 billion years before any of us came onto the scene, so it is clearly doubtful that an infinite life span is possible, even in principle.  Of course, we could play with how we define *infinity* (such as open ended, extended, etc), but why allow for the confusion in defining our terms if we could instead just as easily be more accurate in our phraseology?


Because our phraseology sounds incredibly castrated when it is entirely accurate. The word "infinite" is thrown around quite readily in the human language - it tends to mean "a heck of a lot more than we have now". For example, news articles reference fusion as a "near-infinite source of energy". So I think we should use it too.

The alternatives-

"For extended lifespans"
"For pretty long lifespans"
"For immense lifespans"
"For non-pathetic lifespans"
"For lifespans of ample length"
"For near-infinite-but-not-quite-because-of-the-finite-age-of-the-universe lifespans"

...all sound lame. We are the Immortality Institute, for infinite lifespans. If we need to create a basement universe to live longer, we shall. If we need to accelerate our cognitive processing speeds a billionfold to enjoy the time more, we shall. If we need to build a Dyson cloud to support a huge population of immortals, it will be done. That's the whole idea - we'll never stop extending life, happiness, and all of conscious experience as much as we can possibly muster.

#8 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:32 AM

Thanks, MA.

You're about to change my mind back to infinite :)

imminst.org/stats is broken.

I think alphabetical for the 4 (AI, Bio, Cry, Nano) is OK.. but open to ideas.

#9 lunarsolarpower

  • Guest
  • 1,323 posts
  • 53
  • Location:BC, Canada

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:32 AM

I would suggest "For unending life" or "For unending lives". This doesn't throw up the philosophical/mathematical warnings that any claim of infinity in the real world is likely to do. On the other hand it pulls no punches about what the goal actually is. We aren't the Life Extension Foundation, we're the Immortality Institute.

#10 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:44 AM

ImmInst Stats:

Figures in parentheses refer to the 7-day period ending Jul 04 2006 at 11:05 PM.

Successful requests: 91,788,893 (2,409,854)
Average successful requests per day: 1,349,905 (344,264)
Successful requests for pages: 2,513,533 (60,771)
Average successful requests for pages per day: 36,965 (8,681)
Failed requests: 383,514 (2,132)
Redirected requests: 2,609,461 (18,231)
Distinct files requested: 180,015 (46,190)
Distinct hosts served: 88,059 (9,366)
Data transferred: 954.21 gigabytes (23.46 gigabytes)
Average data transferred per day: 14.03 gigabytes (3.35 gigabytes)

#11 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:47 AM

I think the slogan should be "Beating the shit out of aging" :)

#12 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:50 AM

We don't have good extended stat numbers as we've move to Canaca.com hosting recently (thanks to Canaca for their donations and hosting us!).

#13 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:52 AM

Michael, you forgot For Open Ended Life Spans.

#14 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:53 AM

As usual Nate, keeping it real.

#15 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:53 AM

Put me down for Open-Ended. Not only is it more accurate, but also conveys that it is a CHOICE how long we choose to live. I think the Immortality in our name conveys enough of the "hardcoreness" or whatever. The combo of the two goes quite nicely with Aubrey's push, IMO.

If only we could work in healthspan somewhere a new visitor could see it.

#16 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 06 July 2006 - 01:56 AM

I think the Immortality in our name conveys enough of the "hardcoreness" or whatever. The combo of the two goes quite nicely with Aubrey's push, IMO.


Yes, that's an excellent point and I think "open ended" or "extended" represents a good compromise between the two extremes.

#17 lunarsolarpower

  • Guest
  • 1,323 posts
  • 53
  • Location:BC, Canada

Posted 06 July 2006 - 02:56 AM

For life without limits...

What do you think?

#18 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 03:07 AM

Along these lines of discussion, Nate (Life Forever) has created (using Jay Fox's ImmInst logo) a three rotation graphic for the homepage... feedback welcome:
http://www.imminst.o...t=0#entry119238

#19 jaydfox

  • Guest
  • 6,214 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 06 July 2006 - 03:32 AM

The problem I have with the word *infinite* is that it is inaccurate. This universe had already been around for 13.2 billion years before any of us came onto the scene, so it is clearly doubtful that an infinite life span is possible, even in principle.

Wait, what does the current age of the universe have to do with whether an infinite lifespan is possible? Infinity minus 13.2 billion is still infinity. While I think infinite lifespans *might* be impossible for other reasons (physical, semantic, etc.), the current age of the universe isn't the problem.

#20 jaydfox

  • Guest
  • 6,214 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 06 July 2006 - 03:34 AM

We don't have good extended stat numbers as we've move to Canaca.com hosting recently (thanks to Canaca for their donations and hosting us!).

Hmm, the old site should still be out there, nebulously... Perhaps we can download all those stats for future reference. Since both sites used cPanel, perhaps we can even import the older stats into the new database (I assume it uses a database, but maybe not...).

#21 brandonreinhart

  • Guest
  • 67 posts
  • 0

Posted 06 July 2006 - 06:26 AM

There is writing elsewhere on this site and on the SIAI regarding the argument for focusing Singularity related efforts on Joe Science instead of Joe Blow. I believe that this is true as far as Singularity efforts are concerned, in that Joe Science is much more likely to be of a capacity to contribute something meaningful to the development of GAI.

That being said, I do not believe it is the case for general transhumanism related efforts, such as the persuit of lifespan extention, transhuman legal issues, etc. Simplifying the message to reach a broader audience has a lot of advantages, which we already know.

To advance global awareness, the Immortality Institute hosts an online forum, publishes books, produces films and sponsors conferences.


It seems to me, derived from this statement and the nature of the boards being more of an "enthusiast discussion" than a professional forum, that the goal of ImmInst is to broaden the transhumanist message with an emphasis on immortalism.

I think the content organization on our current main page is fine for a person who is already aquainted with the issues of immortalism. I don't think it's very good for someone who doesn't know much and is curious.

Now, I don't want to dumb anything down. I don't think the delivery should condescend or hold hands. This is tough stuff. Challenging stuff. However, when I see "Discovery of CGK733" as a top headline on the site, I don't see something that I think will appeal to someone curious about extensionism.

I think the first page needs to be "three chords and the truth." The boiled down fundamentals, presented in a compelling manner. We should challenge the visitor with provactive questions like "What would you do if you could live as long as you wanted?" and "What if you could cure disease?" These questions could be links leading to subject-focused discussions of how we see the answers. We would soften up Joe Blow to the possibility that yeah, we really CAN do these things if we apply ourselves.

We have a unique chance to take the nerdy sci-fi out of immortalism. It isn't going to help promote the singularity in the direct way that the SIAI would desire, but it will help spread the "longevity meme."

There's still room for the current front page. It's perfect for members or for "enthusiast" level non-members. What I describe may not even be appropriate for the organization itself. (A possible use for immortality.org, for example.)

But I think that we need to consider our ability to simply help develop a brand for transhumanism. We don't have to be skilled scientists to do something that will contribute to the goals we ultimately want to achieve.

Now, I am, to some extent, throwing stones in a glass house. I understand the interim meaning of life and I've done a piss poor job of pursuing it. I'm really busy with my current software project. I've spent more of my spare time playing World of Warcraft than focusing on my ideology. Michael has berated me in an email for not attending to my extropy blog when really any effort on that blog is better than zero effort. My own participation in ImmInst has been limited and probably comes off as more critical than it should. Don't get me wrong, I love this site. I just think that ImmInst, being one of the more open and democratic transhumanist communities, has the potential to harness that grassroots, community power to create an accessible, Joe Blow oriented meme-engine.

We want to teach SL0 level thinkers about SL2 level technology. You can't just lay out a SL2 futurist vision and say "that's how we think it can be." You have to build up to it. Our front page, that initial presentation, doesn't build up to it. It takes pleasure in the deep details of modern gerontological science, it wallows in the latest info-bits on aging research, and it will completely mystify someone who just wants to "know what ImmInst is all about and why would anyone want to live forever anyway?"

I will try and find a way to mock up some of my ideas. To contribute something more than a noisy post. I have zero artistic skill, however.

#22 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 06 July 2006 - 07:55 AM

I like for infinite lifespans and open ended life spans. Both are cool with me. But what about first time visitors? What do they think of the use of the word "infinite" when we can't back it up given our current tech?

I'm for infinite lifespans...and I love concepts such as infinity! But normal dudes will think we are straight wack and might not get to know that we really don't belive we can live an infinite lifespan if we give up now...because if we do convince ourselves we are for infinite lifespans when don't have the tech to do so, we might become complacent and not do our best to advance research into technologies to achieve this goal...thoughts. Good night dudes.

#23 opales

  • Guest
  • 892 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Espoo, Finland

Posted 06 July 2006 - 08:55 AM

open ended life spans


Seriously people, open ended lifespan is REALLY lame. It is so watered down, anyone who did not follow the conception of that term has hard time understanding what the hell it means. I am absolutely againts it.

Sorry for not commenting before.

#24 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 06 July 2006 - 02:38 PM

Seriously people, open ended lifespan is REALLY lame. It is so watered down, anyone who did not follow the conception of that term has hard time understanding what the hell it means. I am absolutely againts it.


In defense of open-ended, it is becoming a more and more popular term thanks to the gaming industry. In gaming, it is about not having to be pushed into a linear framework. Check out what ol' Wikipedia says about it http://en.wikipedia....nded_(gameplay) . I think this popularization of the term adds another dimension to what open-ended means to us, the first being easy to deduce since we are the immortality institute. It is not only taken, in this instance, as freedom from aging, but as increased freedom in all aspects of one's life. It is a big part of what immortality means to me, because it is a direct consequence of it. It asks the question, "What would you do if you lived hundreds of years?"

#25 brandonreinhart

  • Guest
  • 67 posts
  • 0

Posted 06 July 2006 - 03:01 PM

Open-ended is weak and it really doesn't have much inherent meaning. Infinite is fine if the rest of the site doesn't say "we're straight wack." Heh.

#26 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 06 July 2006 - 04:31 PM

Incidentally, I have a friend who once visited this site - he was a normal guy, relatively clever but not too scientific or anything. His big qualm was, "I see all this talk about how immortality would be really great, but I see nothing about how to achieve it!" Based on this an other observations, I prefer the new, project-focused, science-focused front page, although maybe it could use a bit of dilution. Perhaps the Life Extension Survey could also be linked from the front page? What else would you propose? If we want to change the front page at all, then concrete suggestions should be made.

#27 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 06 July 2006 - 04:49 PM

Definitely , but this thread is only on slogan and paragraph

The way the page was changed recently was someone made it how they liked it and submitted it for evaluation.

#28 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 July 2006 - 05:38 PM

I think the first page needs to be "three chords and the truth." The boiled down fundamentals, presented in a compelling manner. We should challenge the visitor with provactive questions like "What would you do if you could live as long as you wanted?" and "What if you could cure disease?" These questions could be links leading to subject-focused discussions of how we see the answers. We would soften up Joe Blow to the possibility that yeah, we really CAN do these things if we apply ourselves.


Brandon, thinking more about a general public message approach... we have human interest threads such as:

When Did You Become Interested In Immortality?
http://www.imminst.o...ct=ST&f=75&t=51

How Did you find ImmInst.Org?
http://www.imminst.o...=ST&f=75&t=5969

Also, we've created a number of ImmInst Polls here: http://www.imminst.o...rchive/poll.php

Such as:

How Long Do You Wish To Live?
http://www.imminst.o...=ST&f=106&t=830

Why are immortalists mostly men?
http://imminst.org/f...ST&f=141&t=3183

Death... What Is It?
http://imminst.org/f...t=ST&f=1&t=2229

Uploading... would you do it?
http://www.imminst.o...t=ST&f=47&t=157

#29 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 06 July 2006 - 06:20 PM

jay

Wait, what does the current age of the universe have to do with whether an infinite lifespan is possible? Infinity minus 13.2 billion is still infinity. While I think infinite lifespans *might* be impossible for other reasons (physical, semantic, etc.), the current age of the universe isn't the problem.


Yes Jay, I've had these thoughts too. It is always possible to have an infinite subset within infinity, but is that subset truly infinite? Well yes, I guess it is, but really the point is that our use of the term *infinite* refers to a qualitative aspect of a series - dynamic vs static. The problem however is like I said earlier, the meaning is locked into the word. This isn't the case with "open ended" or "extended".

My other motive for supporting one of the other two bylines is a desire to be slightly vague (intentionally so). It is my opinion that, in order to exist for exceedingly vast periods of time, our very psychology will eventually become a mortality factor. Hence there will be an imperative at some point to expand/drastically alter the parameters of the human mind (open ended what, extended what, etc) Clearly, this "long range objective" is something that some of ImmInst's more conservative members feel is too "speculative" (or flat out ridiculous) to be incorporated into the Immortalist movement. But I beg to differ.

#30 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,050 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 06 July 2006 - 11:18 PM

Keep the mottos/slogan coming. In a couple days we should create a master list and vote to narrow it down to 3 or 4, and then have a final vote.

"For Open ended lifespans". I agree with Opales....it just doesn't click.

I like the current slogan just fine because it is very direct and fits the opinion of most Imminst members.

"For indefinte lifespans", not bad but not as good as the original.

If we are going to change it, I really like the suggestion "For life without limits", but I would drop the "for", making it just "Life Without Limits"

In a similar vein I like "More Life". Mostly because it is my idea and I am human, and I have an ego, and like everyone else I am attached to my ideas.

I think "Life Without Limits" and "More Life" are the best marketing slogans suggested thus far. They are short and easy to say. They are also slightly ambiguous....which is good. They have a slightly different meaning for everyone, depending on the person's philosophy or particular area of interest.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users