5 replies to this topic

[Lothar]

The singularity and the Methuselarity: similarities and differences

Aubrey de Grey

Strategy for the Future of Health. Bushko R, ed. 2009.

Posted: Sep 14, 2009

Abstract: Aging, being a composite of innumerable types of molecular and cellular decay, will be defeated incrementally. I have for some time predicted that this succession of advances will feature a threshold, which I here christen the "Methuselarity," following which there will actually be a progressive decline in the rate of improvement in our anti-aging technology that is required to prevent a rise in our risk of death from age-related causes as we become chronologically older. Various commentators have observed the similarity of this prediction to that made by Good, Vinge, Kurzweil and others concerning technology in general (and, in particular, computer technology), which they have termed the "singularity." In this essay I compare and contrast these two concepts. (...)

Read more on the homepage of the „Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies" (IEET):

http://ieet.org/inde...degrey20090913/

[forever freedom]

Very interesting paper. As Aubrey quickly mentioned, I think and hope the Singularity will bring about this Methuselarity; i see no other way to reach it in my lifespan (until the end of this century) other than through the Singularity.

[niner]

Very interesting paper. As Aubrey quickly mentioned, I think and hope the Singularity will bring about this Methuselarity; i see no other way to reach it in my lifespan (until the end of this century) other than through the Singularity.

Aubrey said that the Singularity might precede the Methuselarity, or not. I can easily see the Methuselarity occurring before the Singularity. We have seen a remarkable record of progress in molecular biology in the past 50 years, and that progress is accelerating and building upon itself. The problems we need to solve in order to achieve significant rejuvenation are not incomprehensible, and I contend that they can be attacked with existing technology. It is simply a matter of application of existing technology. That application may need to be massive compared to what it is today, but the amount of effort going into the problem today is still pitifully small. We can do it without the Singularity, but the Singularity would surely make it easier.

[forever freedom]

Very interesting paper. As Aubrey quickly mentioned, I think and hope the Singularity will bring about this Methuselarity; i see no other way to reach it in my lifespan (until the end of this century) other than through the Singularity.

Aubrey said that the Singularity might precede the Methuselarity, or not. I can easily see the Methuselarity occurring before the Singularity. We have seen a remarkable record of progress in molecular biology in the past 50 years, and that progress is accelerating and building upon itself. The problems we need to solve in order to achieve significant rejuvenation are not incomprehensible, and I contend that they can be attacked with existing technology. It is simply a matter of application of existing technology. That application may need to be massive compared to what it is today, but the amount of effort going into the problem today is still pitifully small. We can do it without the Singularity, but the Singularity would surely make it easier.

And what makes you think that in the next decades there will be a greater effort to stop/delay aging? Maybe if a program like SENS would get a funding of several billions per year (and that's a very optimistic perspective; tens of billions per year are more likely to be needed) we just might be able to beat aging in the next 2-3 decades but that seems extremely unlikely to happen.

Now on the dream note, I wonder if this bailout money waste of 700 billion was instead used to research the aging process, what we would achieve. Maybe then it would be possible to beat aging in the next few decades. But unfortunately the useless bureaucrats in the world's governments prefer to postpone problems and to spend money in whatever will bring the greatest short-term returns so that they'll get more votes and popularity. Unfortunately to beat aging we would need a long-term perspective and i don't see in the near future the myopic politicians giving this issue much thought.

[KalaBeth]

I would think the point is not that there will be a greater effort, but rather that what effort that is being made is cumulative - and that as our general capabilities increase, similar minimal effort will yield higher results. Well, that and that once the gold ring is actually plausibly in sight, the effort will increase... because then it will be short term gains.

I can see the fruits of this research being one of the few things that could save the Western governments from complete insolvency over the coming decades... if no one is aging, then there's no reason to send everyone a retirement check at 65 (or 72, or whatever it will be by then). So the case could be made that developing a robust (perhaps even largely automated) anti-aging-damage treatment is ultimately a cost-saver in the budgets of the Western gov'ts. (Though without the enabling technologies and a good roadmap actually in hand, I wouldn't say it's a good case honestly.)

That said, I'm inclined to agree with you on the "not in the next few decades" timeline, at least for general use. Certainly I don't see any kind of "Manhattan Project" type commitment anytime in the foreseeable future, not with so many other causes and priorities pushing for attention.

And what makes you think that in the next decades there will be a greater effort to stop/delay aging? Maybe if a program like SENS would get a funding of several billions per year (and that's a very optimistic perspective; tens of billions per year are more likely to be needed) we just might be able to beat aging in the next 2-3 decades but that seems extremely unlikely to happen.

[Oliver_R]

I was intrigued by Aubrey saying in this article that , while he is well-known for saying the first 1000-year-old is probably not much younger than the first 150-year-old, he also thinks the first million-year-old and billion-year-old are quite likely to be only slightly younger again... I have not heard him talking in quite such immortalist terms before