• 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

#31 RighteousReason

  • Guest
  • 2,491 posts
  • -103
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 06 July 2006 - 11:42 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.

Sorry for not commenting before


...what he said.

#32 Normal Dan

  • Guest
  • 112 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Idaho, USA, EARTH, Milky Way, 2006

Posted 06 July 2006 - 11:46 PM

"Join Us or Die"
Ok, maybe not appropriate, but kind of honest in an ironic sort of way

#33 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:15 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.


Open ended lifespans is still more realistic than offering a hype statement such as "for Infinite Lifespans." We don't have a way to live an infinite lifespan based on our current technologies; so "for infinite lifespans" isn't really representative of reality.

#34 jaydfox

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:17 AM

We don't have a way to live an infinite lifespan based on our current technologies; so "for infinite lifespans" isn't really representative of reality.

We didn't have a way of getting to the moon based on technology available in the 1800's. Would you say that the idea of going to the moon wasn't representative of reality? Last I checked, we've been there, done that. Current technology isn't the issue. Heck, we can't cure aging with current technology.

#35 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:40 AM

We didn't have a way of getting to the moon based on technology available in the 1800's. Would you say that the idea of going to the moon wasn't representative of reality? Last I checked, we've been there, done that. Current technology isn't the issue. Heck, we can't cure aging with current technology.


True, we did reach the moon, but...

[tung]

I would say claiming you've already reached the moon in the 1800's might slow your progression there -- especially if you wanted to be taken seriously by other scientists who might actually get you to the moon...it goes back to the in vitro assumption thingy...we don't even know infinity exists, except for theoretically, right? What's our plan to get there, really -- based on our current understanding of the universe?

For Infinite Lifespans is an assumption not based on any evidence, right? Going to the moon, as an idea, yes, was probably laughed at in the 1800s -- so was flying. But was there any evidence to suggest we could get there based on our available technologies in the 1800s? Did they have a plan in the 1800s to reach the moon? I'm not sure, but I don't think that idea was developed such that it could be effectively implemented in the 1800s, and I think if we formed a faction called "flying to the moon club" in the 1800s, it would not advance our progression to the moon whatseover.

It was, if I understand it correctly, the convergence of several technologies that allowed us to travel to the moon -- not the existence of a group whose front line message was "For the moon..." Maybe I am just too skeptical.

It's just I don't think being unrealisitic will do anything but perhaps hurt our chances of achieving our goal -- especially among fellow scientists, that are generally a more conservative lot than most.

For extended lifespan sounds pretty good...and realistic too..and not extremist, or far fetched. What do others think?

#36 jaydfox

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:45 AM

For Infinite Lifespans is an assumption not based on any evidence, right? Going to the moon, as an idea, yes, was probably laughed at in the 1800s -- so was flying. But was there any evidence to suggest we could get there based on our available technologies in the 1800s? Did they have a plan in the 1800s to reach the moon?

The point is that society and scientists have consistently underestimated the limits of Man's technology and ultimate potential. Taming our sights because we want to appease those who can't imagine breaking current limits isn't the right way to go.

#37 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 02:53 AM

I'm not saying we should tame our sights, or to settle for anything but our ultimate goal. What I am saying is that we could achieve our goals perhaps faster if we can marry the concepts of modernity and infinity to a more palatable saying for our front line message.

Like I said, I am not afraid of infinity. I love infinite series and I kicked ass in that Math course (thanks to a great professor). However, Jay, (as I know you love Math too) trying to teach the alternating series test to a student who does not understand the significance of checking the limit as n-->oo (the divergence test) or know what it means for the first derivative of a function to be negative won't do him or her too much good in testing whether or not an alternating series ultimately converges or not. I like this site with its current configuration; but for us to acheive our goal, I think a step by step approach for our "students" might work better. Just thoughts, my friend.

#38 reason

  • Guardian Reason
  • 1,101 posts
  • 241
  • Location:US

Posted 07 July 2006 - 05:14 AM

For lack of a better place to put it: two items down from the blurb, there's a missing "c" in "sreening" for the lysosens entry.

#39 Bruce Klein

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 05:27 AM

Thanks, Reason... corrected.

#40 Bruce Klein

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:03 AM

In line with Brandon's call for more basic intro. material, I've added a link to Nate's (Live Forever) FAQ wikipage to the right hand side of the homepage: http://www.imminst.org

#41

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:17 AM

The point is that society and scientists have consistently underestimated the limits of Man's technology and ultimate potential. Taming our sights because we want to appease those who can't imagine breaking current limits isn't the right way to go.


There are scientists and there are scientists. What about the scientists who made the paradigm-shifting discoveries in the first place? It isn't dreamy-eyed wishful laymen that make the breakthroughs. It is hard-core scientists who tenaciously, relentlessly and often obcessively gnaw at a problem until they find a solution. That is why ImmInst must respect, acknowledge and accomodate this vitally critical demographic.

Society's level of expectation from science and technology is largely a function of what is filtered by press and politics. The Internet, via sites such as ImmInst can bypass those filters but cannot afford to pretend they don't exist. If we are to succeed as an advocacy group we must be able to make a case that can withstand traditional peer review process.

#42

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:19 AM

Posted Image

Clean, strong, precise, dignified.

#43 Live Forever

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:24 AM

In line with Brandon's call for more basic intro. material, I've added a link to Nate's (Live Forever) FAQ wikipage to the right hand side of the homepage: http://www.imminst.org

It might be good to make a page with a more "permanent" FAQ. (just a regular page instead of a wiki entry, maybe?) The info from the one now could be revised; cryonics and AI/Singularity probably need more of a mention than just the very last part, it is more focused on aging-related stuff, but that was what I was feeling at the time I suppose. ;)

Posted Image

That header is almost as long as one of my appendages that shall remain nameless.

#44

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:32 AM

Life extension may seem far-fetched to many, but it's not a fantasy. Driven by a convergence of numerous technological advancements, including Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Artificial Intelligence, progress in life extension has already started. To advance global awareness, ImmInst hosts an online forum, publishes books, produces films, and sponsors conferences. To accelerate progress we support initiatives such as the MPrize, AGIRI, SENS and will consider sponsorship of strategic scientific research.


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.



#45 lunarsolarpower

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:36 AM

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.


I agree that its better as "Life Without Limits". It offers freedom and it doesn't back down from the ultimate purpose of ImmInst. At the same time, it is inoffensive and it doesn't set off anybody's infinity buzzer.

#46 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:48 AM

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.


I agree that its better as "Life Without Limits". It offers freedom and it doesn't back down from the ultimate purpose of ImmInst. At the same time, it is inoffensive and it doesn't set off anybody's infinity buzzer.


I like Life Without Limits a lot too! I like Harold's new design as well. But as far as my heart, it goes out to Life Without Limits! That's rad!

#47 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:49 AM

Posted Image

Clean, strong, precise, dignified.


Agreed.

I like it, can we see a full page preview? I mean with it in place.

#48 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:51 AM

I should probably say that I often do not have the time to read everyone's comments before I post something in reply. So it might come off as rude. Some days, I am just in a rush to get going and only have a few minutes to read this forum...so I get impatient before replying...I try not to do this...in this case I missed Life Without Limits...which I think is cool!

#49 zoolander

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 06:58 AM

I consider myself to have a very particular and keen eye for graphic design.

This



Posted Image

seriously makes my mouth water.

Additionaly I agree that the "Advocacy and Research on the Attainment of Indefinite Lifespan" is the best byline/ststement I have seen yet.

Well done Prometheus.

Correct me if I am wrong prometheus but that is Myriad pro, right? I think we should change the entire font layout into that font.

Edited by zoolander, 07 July 2006 - 07:09 AM.


#50 Live Forever

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:01 AM

It still, however, utilizes the "alien graphic". (who mentioned that it looked like an alien originally? was that Jay?)

#51 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:02 AM

The point is that society and scientists have consistently underestimated the limits of Man's technology and ultimate potential. Taming our sights because we want to appease those who can't imagine breaking current limits isn't the right way to go.


There are scientists and there are scientists. What about the scientists who made the paradigm-shifting discoveries in the first place? It isn't dreamy-eyed wishful laymen that make the breakthroughs. It is hard-core scientists who tenaciously, relentlessly and often obcessively gnaw at a problem until they find a solution. That is why ImmInst must respect, acknowledge and accomodate this vitally critical demographic.

Society's level of expectation from science and technology is largely a function of what is filtered by press and politics. The Internet, via sites such as ImmInst can bypass those filters but cannot afford to pretend they don't exist. If we are to succeed as an advocacy group we must be able to make a case that can withstand traditional peer review process.


I really like the way the bold part is said; I want to be able to explain these concepts piecemeal to people I meet at my school without them looking at me like I am crazy...

#52 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:07 AM

Due to excellent creativity from ImmInst Director, Harold Brenner...


What "Stack" is Prometheus taking to evoke so much creativity? [lol]

#53 jaydfox

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:20 AM

It still, however, utilizes the "alien graphic". (who mentioned that it looked like an alien originally? was that Jay?)

Um, I think it was Mind.

#54

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:29 AM

Posted Image

Clean, strong, precise, dignified.


Agreed.

I like it, can we see a full page preview? I mean with it in place.


http://www.imminst.org/neo/

#55 Bruce Klein

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:35 AM

QUOTE (neo)

Life extension may seem far-fetched to many, but it's not a fantasy. Driven by a convergence of numerous technological advancements, including Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Artificial Intelligence, progress in life extension has already started. To advance global awareness, ImmInst hosts an online forum, publishes books, produces films, and sponsors conferences. To accelerate progress we support initiatives such as the MPrize, AGIRI, SENS and will consider sponsorship of strategic scientific research.


QUOTE (existing)

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.


Changes suggested in blue:

existing: Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Cryonics and Nanotechnology,
neo: Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Artificial Intelligence

As Michael Anissimov suggested, including Cryonics in this list seems essential to our mission. Also, Alcor has been a reliable supporter of the Institute. I'm for having this in alphabetical order.. but no biggie.

existing: Immortality Institute
neo: ImmInst

Within this first impression statement, I tend to think it better to write out the whole ImmInst name.

existing:
neo: To accelerate progress we support initiatives such as the MPrize, AGIRI, SENS and will consider sponsorship of strategic scientific research.

While highlighting other non-profits is generally important, I feel it's also important that we retain a more egalitarian approach in order to more successfully gain support from other orgs, such as LEF.org, Alcor, etc... for future projects. We do have an ImmInst Affiliates' page which may somehow be made more apparant from the homepage.

#56

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:36 AM

It still, however, utilizes the "alien graphic".


By making the graphic smaller and placing it on the left side of the title, where we are accustomed to seeing left justified logos in respect to copy, it is more balanced and appropriately de-emphasized. In this way it no longer needs modification.

#57 Bruce Klein

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:45 AM

Harold,

Would you change the phrasing to include "infinite" rather than "indefinite"?

#58

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:45 AM

Changes suggested in blue: 

existing: Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Cryonics and Nanotechnology, 
neo:  Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Artificial Intelligence

As Michael Anissimov suggested, including Cryonics in this list seems essential to our mission.  Also, Alcor has been a reliable supporter of the Institute.  I'm for having this in alphabetical order.. but no biggie.

existing: Immortality Institute
neo:  ImmInst

Within this first impression statement, I tend to think it better to write out the whole ImmInst name.

existing:
neo:  To accelerate progress we support initiatives such as the MPrize, AGIRI, SENS and will consider sponsorship of strategic scientific research.

While highlighting other non-profits is generally important, I feel it's important that we retain a more egalitarian approach in order to more successfully gain support from other orgs, such as LEF.org, Alcor, etc... for future projects.  We do have an ImmInst Affiliates' page which may somehow be more apparant from the homepage.


- I'm a bit concerned about using the term cryonics. A pubmed search using the term "cryonics" is not particularly flattering. Could we consider the use of the term cryopreservation?

- I would still place Biotechnology first. People do not make the connection first off between AI and longevity, and it is the most promising of all the "initiatives".

- Agreed on ImmInst, however if this statement is placed on the right hand column one tries to save space where one can.

- These are our 3 closest relationships by far.

#59 doug123

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:50 AM

I like all of these ideas! I can't keep up!

#60 Bruce Klein

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

Posted 07 July 2006 - 07:51 AM

- I'm a bit concerned about using the term cryonics. A pubmed search using the term "cryonics" is not particularly flattering. Couold we consider the use of the term cryopreservation?

Done.

- I would still place Biotechnology first. People do not make the connection first off between AI and longevity, and it is the most promising of all the "initiatives".

Changed to Bio, Cry, Nano and AI.

- Agreed on ImmInst, however if this statement is placed on the right hand column one tries to save space where one can.

Understand... however, the middle seems more balanced.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users