27 replies to this topic

[Julia36]

Its a gamble but the numbers of people signing up may justify it.

One way could be to invite anyone who would sign up for $1,000 to express an interest (by crowd funding?)

Something like a conditional pledge.

Advertising has to me SIMPLE General and SHORT to reach the people.

Another way if for people to put in $1,000 and decide if they want yo do it later or get a full refund.

Ettinger's vision of everyone doing it is far away

[YOLF]

This is something I'd definitely like to see and I think the answer would come from globalism and improvements to the cryonics process. I imagine that we'll be able to achieve cryonics by freezing and storing only a select portion(s) of the brain. Currently KrioRus offers neuro for $10,000. Further improvements could also be made to the storage of heads. I'm thinking that the less space that has to be filled with LN2 or a sub zero gas, the less of the material we will need.

For instance, if we were able to establish cryonics in Bangladesh(BD) with our most advanced and efficient technologies, we could pull off $1000 cryonics or get pretty close.

It takes alot of energy to maintain LN2 temperatures (-196 degrees), so just moving to a cold gas storage would save alot of money. When sperm, ova, and cord blood are stored, they are stored at much higher subzero temps, I don't see why we couldn't do this with cryonics.

If we can stick to neuro we can also make the left over organs of cryonicists available to others and there may be some benefit here if the profits from the service fees to remove the organs are used subsidize cryonics. Improved procedures that separate the brain from other circulatory fluids will be needed for this as the brain is currently perfused through the circulatory system.

Even at $10,000, neuro is still an attractive option for people. A recent death in my family resulted in a bill for around $12,000 for death expenses related to cremation, so cryonics is a cheaper option for some (her ashes were used to feed a somewhat premium plot of grass, but this is apparently fairly common and people have been buried in brand new $90k luxury cars). Personally, I say sell the family plot and invest the money in cryonics, but the choice wasn't left to me in this case. Imagine if cryonics was in fact a $1,000 option with the the possibility and probability of eventual reanimation into a brand new body of one's own design with the impact of saving the lives of those needing organ replacements. Would that not be a better world with so many dieing from need of an organ? Currently cryonicists must abstain from conventional organ donation as their isn't a way to harvest their organs that won't compromise their cryopreservation. But that just doesn't have to be the case.

Edited by cryonicsculture, 22 December 2013 - 05:51 AM.

[Julia36]

For instance, if we were able to establish cryonics in Bangladesh(BD) with our most advanced and efficient technologies, we could pull off $1000 cryonics or get pretty close.

It takes alot of energy to maintain LN2 temperatures (-196 degrees), so just moving to a cold gas storage would save alot of money. When sperm, ova, and cord blood are stored, they are stored at much higher subzero temps, I don't see why we couldn't do this with cryonics.

If we can stick to neuro we can also make the left over organs of cryonicists available to others and there may be some benefit here if the profits from the service fees to remove the organs are used subsidize cryonics. Improved procedures that separate the brain from other circulatory fluids will be needed for this as the brain is currently perfused through the circulatory system.

Even at $10,000, neuro is still an attractive option for people. A recent death in my family resulted in a bill for around $12,000 for death expenses related to cremation, so cryonics is a cheaper option for some (her ashes were used to feed a somewhat premium plot of grass, but this is apparently fairly common and people have been buried in brand new $90k luxury cars). Personally, I say sell the family plot and invest the money in cryonics, but the choice wasn't left to me in this case. Imagine if cryonics was in fact a $1,000 option with the the possibility and probability of eventual reanimation into a brand new body of one's own design with the impact of saving the lives of those needing organ replacements. Would that not be a better world with so many dieing from need of an organ? Currently cryonicists must abstain from conventional organ donation as their isn't a way to harvest their organs that won't compromise their cryopreservation. But that just doesn't have to be the case.

Interesting comparison.
Solar not enough?
The process needs automating: eventually microrobots will do miles better than we can in suspensions.
By that time we may have enough technology for revivals.

Re:organs, first simple organs are expected to be 3D PRINTED IN 2014, and 5 years after that complete ones may be.

[YOLF]

A solar array, perhaps one earning money remotely as part of a shared investment, could meet the efficiancy requirements for compressed nitrogen gas temperatures, but currently the cost of solar generated energy isn't enough to sustain LN2 and storage of the extra LN2 may increase the amount that boils off, but I'd have to look at the figures again. Still people may die in 5 years and printed organs aren't as sufficient as the real thing currently. Time may increase the effectiveness of the organs, but there is still no telling how long they will last. The extra lives in the mean time are probably worth it unless the vast majority of those needing cryonics in the next five years are expected to be unuseable as conventional organ donors. Currently I'm only aware of a handful of organs that are being printed also, so more organs may still be necessary from other sources. My roommate's friend was apparently worth $2 million to the company that harvested her organs, I assume that means they took every tissue possible out of her at that price tag.

I'm not sure how it could be automated, and currently the people doing the preservations usually do so on a volunteer basis. The largest cost of cryonics by far is standby support and transportation. Do you have any suggestions? Both Alcor and CI have their processes on their websites or the info is available from them.

[Julia36]

A solar array, perhaps one earning money remotely as part of a shared investment, could meet the efficiancy requirements for compressed nitrogen gas temperatures, but currently the cost of solar generated energy isn't enough to sustain LN2 and storage of the extra LN2 may increase the amount that boils off

Still people may die in 5 years and printed organs aren't as sufficient as the real thing currently. Time may increase the effectiveness of the organs, but there is still no telling how long they will last.

The issue is data right?
How we have access to someone's data /record the data/ is the major set that includes storing by cryo? So if sufficient scanning was possible, freezing wouldn't be so necessary.

I dont know where data scanning is but it's obviously accelerating.

The extra lives in the mean time are probably worth it unless the vast majority of those needing cryonics in the next five years are expected to be unuseable as conventional organ donors. Currently I'm only aware of a handful of organs that are being printed also, so more organs may still be necessary from other sources. My roommate's friend was apparently worth $2 million to the company that harvested her organs, I assume that means they took every tissue possible out of her at that price tag.

I'm not sure how it could be automated,

robots are routine in surgery, some done remotely, and microrobots coming fast

and currently the people doing the preservations usually do so on a volunteer basis.

That is nutty & cant continue & suspect premised on survival of the minders ie it's in your interest to make it work so you can live

OTTOMH a sales drive city-to-city of dynamic cryonics speakers, leafleting the churches (USA) may grab lots of signees?

Its always amazed me what rubbish is sold by people who just organize to sell it.
provisional on 10,000 signing up by X date eg crowdfunding ,

then anyone who signs up must have a strong interest in getting his friends to sign up.


But cost may be a sales angle? If its $1000 .

The largest cost of cryonics by far is standby support and transportation. Do you have any suggestions? Both Alcor and CI have their processes on their websites or the info is available from them.

Transportation cost can be addressed by local storage and requirement that people move close to it. As most people die with warning that is debatable.


Publicity is clearly helpful.

A law suit against the US for failing to provide life by suspension could be waged, with great bloggers and negotiated media coverage.

An aim would be to get a home cryonic suspension.

This was nuts 10 years ago, but robiticsation of the process and storage capsules that cryonics companies could get made and sold may help.

DFiscounts for some groups, eg Malitia/ churches could get people signed up.

[YOLF]

Hi Innocent,

Please don't confuse digital storage and existence w/ life. Digital lives are over hyped and your existence as an AI isn't you. You are dead, and a copy of you has replaced you. If your best friend wants to go get some drinks, you'll be... Personally I wouldn't mind having a digital copy of me around to live in tandem with, in fact I see it as a benefit, but digital existence alone is giving up your physical life when future technologies will be able to make virtually any physical form a possibility.

For efficiency of space and material, and sustainability we must store the smallest amount of us necessary in the smallest space possible and print the rest of us when the tech becomes available. Scanning will come in handy when we wish to determine the best shape body to print for you, essentially allowing you to design your body like you were using DAZ Studio and a 3D model of Michael or Victoria Ver. XX that allows for internal biology options etc. The digital existence during this phase would also be responsible for helping bring the cryonicist up to speed on the future or undertake other efforts and will receive the physical experience through cyberization.

Robotizing surgery may work, I don't know much about it, but I know there are alot of people who don't want to be the first or we could have had robot surgery 20-30 years ago

I think there are some good opportunities for cryonics in crowdfunding if we can build a crowd. If we get 1000 from the people ahead of time, or even 2000, the money could go to developing the technology. The volunteerism model has survived for quite some time and is responsible for the highest price cryonics company (at time of founding) become the most inexpensive for whole body at present. The Cryonics Institute has always charged $28000 for full body. When they were founded, that was $218,000 and they've mostly kept up with the tech, they just need to make neuro available IMHO. Alcor is currently charging $200,000 but was charging far less than CI when they were founded. Admittedly, you get a Cardiothoracic Surgeon at Alcor vs a Funeral Director (?) at CI, but either can do the operation IMO and from what I understand, some Cardiothoracic Surgeons may work probono for Alcor in which case Alcor can use the money for sustainability and outreach. Volunteerism is sometimes the difference between success and failure. I want cryonicists to live again, so I don't mind helping out, it's not that I feel I have to, it's that I want to. People are thankful to me for something I like doing and like being a part of. It's a good feeling.

I agree with moving closer and having more local storage and what not, but we have to achieve efficiency of scale at all of these places or it's going to get more expensive. Real Estate is cheap in the vicinity of both cryonics providers, so we just need to create jobs in these areas for cryonicists and this will improve the quality of cryopreservations across the board.

In order to sue the States for not providing cryonics, we have to develop the tech to make it work. We're getting closer and will get there.

There are currently procedures you can follow at home to be ready if someone you trust is with you. There are a handful of supplements you can take and a chest thumper that can be used on you in conjunction with icing your head and body in a bathtub until suspended animation or another group gets to you. If certain tech works out, it may make home cryonics more possible, but will add additional expense though if the tech was dropped off on site for those in imminent need, that would help alot. This is even a possibility right now if more funeral directors and hospitals started offering cryopreservation procedures.

[Julia36]

http://s3.amazonaws....e1685464d39.jpg

Edited by Innocent, 06 January 2014 - 08:59 PM.

[Julia36]

I never mentioned digital storage??
Bob challenged me on this too???

Edited by Innocent, 06 January 2014 - 09:34 PM.

[Julia36]

[quote name='cryonicsculture' timestamp='1388955944' post='634393']
Hi Innocent,

Please don't confuse digital storage and existence w/ life. Digital lives are over hyped and your existence as an AI isn't you. You are dead, and a copy of you has replaced you. If your best friend wants to go get some drinks, you'll be... Personally I wouldn't mind having a digital copy of me around to live in tandem with, in fact I see it as a benefit, but digital existence alone is giving up your physical life when future technologies will be able to make virtually any physical form a possibility.

[/quote]

What is a you?


[quote]

For efficiency of space and material, and sustainability we must store the smallest amount of us necessary
[/quote]


which is?

[quote]
and print the rest of us
[/quote]


which is precisely?


I agree the self is an unknown @ present.


So is the past.

The gamble is betting that technology (ie mathematics shaping the environment) is going to get much better.I think a map of deceased people is obviously not that person. But using that map to reconstruct from - a map of sufficient detail - the dead could be reconstituted.

To argue that couldn't happen is illogical, since that would mean some part of human is outside man's science, yet we can use man's science to cryo-preserve it!!!

Argument to the future is banned in philosophy, since it can not be proven true.

However as futurists, we allow the belief that technology will progress, since it always has in mankind's history.

It is a fundamental belief, a religion, and optimism and can not be used in debate as a truth, since the observed trend may break for many reasons eg by an extinction.




[quote]
when the tech becomes available. Scanning will come in handy when we wish to determine the best shape body to print for you, essentially allowing you to design your body like you were using DAZ Studio and a 3D model of Michael or Victoria Ver. XX that allows for internal biology options etc. The digital existence during this phase would also be responsible for helping bring the cryonicist up to speed on the future or undertake other efforts and will receive the physical experience through cyberization.


[/quote]

O I see.

I hadn't thought about digital existence as a life form! I gather Frank Tipler holds it existence and some that that entire universe is a hologram eg a Bostrom's Simulation.

I too waive simulations and mean a reconstruction by data-mining the past as a likely scenario, good enough to micro-robot build any person and memories.

It looks easier when you have frozen bodies to work from, but the size of calculation, though daunting, is an argument of scale.

What limit of archaeology?

What limit on mathematics?

But cryonic preservation of your data is sensible.


[quote]

Robotizing surgery may work, I don't know much about it, but I know there are alot of people who don't want to be the first or we could have had robot surgery 20-30 years ago


[/quote]

I know people who've had it. Fear of going first first isn't a valid argument in this context!

[quote]
I think there are some good opportunities for cryonics in crowdfunding if we can build a crowd. If we get 1000 from the people ahead of time, or even 2000, the money could go to developing the technology.

[/quote]

If you got a pledge of $1,000 conditional on getting 1 million people pledged,
and followed with a dramatic social networked campaign,

I think people would do it, but I haven't market surveyed this,

It could however be determined by a sampling survey



[quote]
The volunteerism model has survived for quite some time and is responsible for the highest price cryonics company (at time of founding) become the most inexpensive for whole body at present.

[/quote]


OWCH!



[quote]
The Cryonics Institute has always charged $28000 for full body. When they were founded, that was $218,000 and they've mostly kept up with the tech, they just need to make neuro available IMHO. Alcor is currently charging $200,000 but was charging far less than CI when they were founded. Admittedly, you get a Cardiothoracic Surgeon at Alcor vs a Funeral Director (?) at CI, but either can do the operation IMO and from what I understand, some Cardiothoracic Surgeons may work probono for Alcor in which case Alcor can use the money for sustainability and outreach.

[/quote]






[quote]


I agree with moving closer and having more local storage

[/quote]


Yup strategy.



[quote]
, but we have to achieve efficiency of scale at all of these places or it's going to get more expensive.

[/quote]

THat's a matter of organisation see suntzu.



[quote]
Real Estate is cheap in the vicinity of both cryonics providers, so we just need to create jobs in these areas for cryonicists and this will improve the quality of cryopreservations across the board.

[/quote]

There is POTS opf money about and stuff is tumbling in price. Land that is chepa can be irrigated.

Necessary land can be built out of the seas.


[quote]

In order to sue the States for not providing cryonics, we have to develop the tech to make it work. We're getting closer and will get there.

[/quote]

You'd think so, but proof of concept is enough.

ie prove iotls is unsceintific to beleive that resurrection (recovery) is impossible: if something is not impossible, it can only mean it is possible.


[quote]

There are currently procedures you can follow at home to be ready if someone you trust is with you. There are a handful of supplements you can take and a chest thumper that can be used on you

[/quote]


[quote]
in conjunction with icing your head and body in a bathtub until

[/quote]

You must use ad hominems in debate.


[quote]
suspended animation or another group gets to you. If certain tech works out, it may make home cryonics more possible, but will add additional expense though if the tech was dropped off on site for those in imminent need, that would help alot.

[/quote]

Yup this is good.



[quote]
This is even a possibility right now if more funeral directors and hospitals started offering cryopreservation procedures.
[/quote]

I see.

Most enlightening - thanks.

[PWAIN]

I think there are some good opportunities for cryonics in crowdfunding if we can build a crowd. If we get 1000 from the people ahead of time, or even 2000, the money could go to developing the technology.

If you got a pledge of $1,000 conditional on getting 1 million people pledged,
and followed with a dramatic social networked campaign,

I think people would do it, but I haven't market surveyed this,

It could however be determined by a sampling survey

I don't believe that you could get 1 million people to sign up even if it was free. It requires a change in attitudes and perception first. I think you will get at best a hundred or so if you are lucky. It is not the cost that puts people off, it is the ickiness of it. If you want to get cryonics out there, find a way to make it 'cool', then they would come by the millions.

[YOLF]

I never mentioned digital storage??
Bob challenged me on this too???

Well you did say the issue was data right? Sorry I assumed you were talking about storing us as data rather than flesh. Who's Bob?

What's with the Frankenstein vid?

[YOLF]

What is a you? How much space does it take up etc? I don't know, that's why I spoke broadly. But I propose that some meaningful portion of one's physical self contains the "you." I don't so much think of my body (that is the rest of me that is not part of my think therefor I am identity) as me. Like if one loses weight, are they someone else? Sure the fat affects how the brain operates, but interferes with optimal operation of the brain beyond a certain BMI or other more accurate metric.

Without some portion of you in it's original construction to continue operation, a construction of you wouldn't be you, just a copy. If you bring it up because of the Re-Live technology that I've mentioned in another thread where the brain is backed up and erased, then consider what is also not you on an existential basis that will be preserved. Somewhere there is an ideal "you" and we tend to be polluted by negative experiences. So in order to continue making the world a better place, the ideal self must be fulfilled, meaning that it must have attained an increasingly demanding standard of satisfaction and not just be an identity that is vacuous of positive experiences in which case it would be an empty identity despite being ideal in form and continued function as there is no fulfillment and the identity is essentially a second class entity something that exists today but which is just something we live with as our technology is not sufficiently advanced to overcome it. Because there is a portion of your original construction and Re-Live develops it after nipping off the existential damage and anything necessary to give it fulfillment through the advanced common place practices of the day which is the cyberization enabled real-time cloud AI that ensures a perfect upbringing.

A technologist must be a visionary. A technology philosopher must think to the future. It is perfectly reasonable to say that if man works toward an end it will be accomplished and to make philosophical contingency plans for the development of future technologies.

For instance, I don't agree with abortion, but I don't see why someone being aborted shouldn't be cryopreserved for future reanimation. We are morally obligated to develop technologies that will help people and morally obligated to live long lives to do so unless there are circumstances where the situation is better for someone to choose cryonics. For instance, they say something like 75-90% of the healthcare dollars spent on someone are spent on the last 10% of their lives. So the moral obligation for me is to go into cryostassis when the efforts to extend my life no longer pay dividends. Otherwise efforts are being wasted on me that could be spent on further technologies that will be of greater benefit to me and other in the future. Freeing up all of those healthcare dollars to be spent on development will yield obvious gains in life extension. For instance it will be possible to print entire bodies at some point and to make the cells that are used an improvement over what would have been your embryonic stem cells. So if you're dieing of organ failure, why treat the disease when you can freeze? In the mean time the infrastructure will be developed that will enable sufficient excess to make it cheap to thaw you and print a new body that isn't failing and is cheaper to maintain than your old one which could more efficiently be used to produce fertilizer or be used for those in need of your good organs right now.

With healthcare sciences, I postulate that we know this:
It grows and its occurrence is common to us, and under certain conditions, it grows better or worse. So given the right conditions which are produced naturally, it is possible to grow it again. Growing and manipulating it, that is duplicating existing biological processes must therefor be much easier than making exotic things happen in particle physics and the like which is also looking quite possible to learn. So I just can't see someone saying that "life can't be done." It just hasn't been done. So the only reason the future wouldn't be the answer is because people of the present will interfere with people doing it in the future. So that's who you are arguing against in philosophy. Someone who doesn't think the future should give a shit about you.

I'm not very familiar with the argument that we're just a bostrom simulation or maybe I haven't vetted the argument yet and enough of it has been explained to me through various partial sources.

I think the $1000 is enough for the preservation using an existing technology, additional funds will be needed to develop the technologies and processes for more optimal storage and than is currently used. If robots are to be used, those will cost money too, so the money will need to be raised to buy, maintain, improve, and upgrade the robot system.

As far as Sun Tzu and organization, it costs money to move things and moving it means maybe breaking it, you can't insure people against loss when you are the "insurance." So you have to be able to buy the facilities etc. and maintain them indefinitely with a trust or other income basis as is currently done and people have to be employed to staff it. Perhaps we could Walmartize it, but I haven't seen enough interest to do this, other steps must first be achieved to warrant development that work with something like this.

Building land in the sea is expensive as it means moving alot of material and is only done in places like NYC and the manmade islands of the UAE where the extremely wealthy live. We'd need alot of wealthy donors or a vastly cheaper source of energy to achieve this. I try to think ghetto, think cheap and achieve the highest efficiency possible, then if you get more money, you can maintain/sustain at least the same efficiency. But I don't count on having the personal wealth to do it and I don't think the rich like to be patronized for such vast sums unless they are committed to the same goals. Further development of the immortalist culture, idea, and goals will be necessary to show that it is an improvement over what the wealthy are currently committed to sustaining and that investigation of a new option is warranted and will provide sufficient returns/benefits in terms of humanity.

Can you show me the legal basis for arguing that cryonics must be provided because it can't be proven impossible to save someone's life with it? IOTLS?

I don't understand what you mean by using ad hominem in debate. Isn't that a fallacy? Can you explain how that is relevant to a home cryonics preparation?

Edited by cryonicsculture, 07 January 2014 - 02:09 AM.

[YOLF]

I think there are some good opportunities for cryonics in crowdfunding if we can build a crowd. If we get 1000 from the people ahead of time, or even 2000, the money could go to developing the technology.

If you got a pledge of $1,000 conditional on getting 1 million people pledged,
and followed with a dramatic social networked campaign,

I think people would do it, but I haven't market surveyed this,

It could however be determined by a sampling survey

I don't believe that you could get 1 million people to sign up even if it was free. It requires a change in attitudes and perception first. I think you will get at best a hundred or so if you are lucky. It is not the cost that puts people off, it is the ickiness of it. If you want to get cryonics out there, find a way to make it 'cool', then they would come by the millions.

Well immortalists do have Arthur Levinson (Apple Chairman) working as CEO of Google's California Life Company (Calico), so it is possible that immortality will be the next iPhone! What if we charged $1800 and offered it as part of a package deal with your choice of select smartphones with a custom engraving related to the indefinite lifespan idea or could sell the next tech advance prerelease in support of indefinite lifespans? So if you buy it early for the extra $1000 and we reach a million sales, you get a free cryonics or you get free cryonics when 1M sales of $1000 cryonics are reached. Sounds like an idea that could be further developed?

[PWAIN]

Well immortalists do have Arthur Levinson (Apple Chairman) working as CEO of Google's California Life Company (Calico), so it is possible that immortality will be the next iPhone! What if we charged $1800 and offered it as part of a package deal with your choice of select smartphones with a custom engraving related to the indefinite lifespan idea or could sell the next tech advance prerelease in support of indefinite lifespans? So if you buy it early for the extra $1000 and we reach a million sales, you get a free cryonics or you get free cryonics when 1M sales of $1000 cryonics are reached. Sounds like an idea that could be further developed?

You're missing the point, people are repelled by the idea of cryonics. You have to address that first. I'm not going to buy an iPhone to get cryonics cheap if I don't want cryonics in the first place. You seem to assume that if it was really cheap, people would jump on board but if they find the whole idea repellant, you couldn't even pay they to sign up. What is needed is a change in perception, cryonics is cool, high tech, the future, the norm.

Until then, you are trying to sell snow to Eskimos by offering a free ice lolly to go with it

[Julia36]

? So if you buy it early for the extra $1000 and we reach a million sales, you get a free cryonics or you get free cryonics when 1M sales of $1000 cryonics are reached. Sounds like an idea that could be further developed?

Yup.

It's an expert marketing area.

One thing I learned the hard way was not to do everything that it had taken a gifted expert 8 years to train in.

You're missing the point, people are repelled by the idea of cryonics.

Where exactly did you get this conclusion from?

[PWAIN]

[You're missing the point, people are repelled by the idea of cryonics.

Where exactly did you get this conclusion from?

My ex wife, current and past girlfriends, family, friends, colleagues and dozens of people I have spoken to over the decades. Also you could also look at just how many people have signed up even though $10000 preservations are available and life insurance for that is negligible.

[YOLF]

Well immortalists do have Arthur Levinson (Apple Chairman) working as CEO of Google's California Life Company (Calico), so it is possible that immortality will be the next iPhone! What if we charged $1800 and offered it as part of a package deal with your choice of select smartphones with a custom engraving related to the indefinite lifespan idea or could sell the next tech advance prerelease in support of indefinite lifespans? So if you buy it early for the extra $1000 and we reach a million sales, you get a free cryonics or you get free cryonics when 1M sales of $1000 cryonics are reached. Sounds like an idea that could be further developed?

You're missing the point, people are repelled by the idea of cryonics. You have to address that first. I'm not going to buy an iPhone to get cryonics cheap if I don't want cryonics in the first place. You seem to assume that if it was really cheap, people would jump on board but if they find the whole idea repellant, you couldn't even pay they to sign up. What is needed is a change in perception, cryonics is cool, high tech, the future, the norm.

Until then, you are trying to sell snow to Eskimos by offering a free ice lolly to go with it

Well, I'm going to work towards changing that by showing my vision of the future and I think after applying logic to it, most will accept it.

I'm putting it in my blog, have you seen it?

http://www.longecity...scultures-blog/

[YOLF]

It's interesting to note despite what Steve Jobs thought about death, Arthur Levinson, an Apple Chairman, is CEO of CaLiCo. Even conquering death from aging will leave us with death or need of cryonics for quite some time, bur Jobs revered death as a reason to live and change life, I'll be writing about a different way of seeing death which I find more productive and perhaps Jobs will be rolling in his grave wishing he had signed up for that ambulance ride. Or maybe he was lying to inspire innovation against death in a reverse psychology kind of way, who knows?

[Julia36]

I think there are some good opportunities for cryonics in crowdfunding if we can build a crowd. If we get 1000 from the people ahead of time, or even 2000, the money could go to developing the technology.

If you got a pledge of $1,000 conditional on getting 1 million people pledged,
and followed with a dramatic social networked campaign,

I think people would do it, but I haven't market surveyed this,

It could however be determined by a sampling survey

I don't believe that you could get 1 million people to sign up even if it was free. It requires a change in attitudes and perception first. I think you will get at best a hundred or so if you are lucky. It is not the cost that puts people off, it is the ickiness of it. If you want to get cryonics out there, find a way to make it 'cool', then they would come by the millions.

Your belief and thoughts are interesting PWAIN
but a survey would be actionable.

Edited by Innocent, 08 January 2014 - 12:16 AM.

[Julia36]

[You're missing the point, people are repelled by the idea of cryonics.

Where exactly did you get this conclusion from?

My ex wife, current and past girlfriends, family, friends, colleagues and dozens of people I have spoken to over the decades. Also you could also look at just how many people have signed up even though $10000 preservations are available and life insurance for that is negligible.

Can I see the notes you made?

I dont doubt you canvasedd dozens of people you know.
I think a marketing survey would show if people wouild sign up at negalglble cost IF that became available.

Another Q on the form could be ' would you sign up if it was free?

Would you sign up if tyhe givernment was running it free?
Would yousign up if your friends and family did?

[PWAIN]

Can I see the notes you made?

I dont doubt you canvasedd dozens of people you know.
I think a marketing survey would show if people wouild sign up at negalglble cost IF that became available.

Another Q on the form could be ' would you sign up if it was free?

Would you sign up if tyhe givernment was running it free?
Would yousign up if your friends and family did?

Sounds like a good survey. I would love to see the results. Target audience should be as broad as possible to try give a fair result of general population. I really hope you prove me wrong...

[YOLF]

They did do something like that a while back, it would be interesting to see what the polls look like today.

Edited by cryonicsculture, 08 January 2014 - 01:48 AM.

[PWAIN]

What were the results when they did it back then?

They did do something like that a while back, it would be interesting to see what the polls look like today.

[YOLF]

I don't know the results of the top of my head, I think they were posted to lesswrong though. I'm not seeing it on google at the moment, perhaps it would be better to ask Alcor or CI about it?

[Julia36]

My expernece of campaigning is it's less about reason and more about inciting.
Hitler was a good campaigner.
No one in their right mind would have voted for him but the majority of people did.

Selling is different from the product.

People who are not in selling dont believe that.

People in selling cant believe that people making the product think the product's important.

Edited by Innocent, 10 February 2014 - 02:32 AM.

[YOLF]

The sales jobs I've had all wanted you to be drinking their Koolaid. If you weren't passionate about their product, they didn't want to hire you. Imagine that you love ford truck and are very passionate about them but then get hired to sell Chevys. A customer comes in and asks you how the blazer or something compares to an F150, well to you it obviously doesn't. If you're an impartial salesperson, you'll sell it on it's merits, but with that attitude you're just swindling.

[Julia36]

The sales jobs I've had all wanted you to be drinking their Koolaid. If you weren't passionate about their product, they didn't want to hire you. Imagine that you love ford truck and are very passionate about them but then get hired to sell Chevys. A customer comes in and asks you how the blazer or something compares to an F150, well to you it obviously doesn't. If you're an impartial salesperson, you'll sell it on it's merits, but with that attitude you're just swindling.

Relax, every design and development department thinks salesmen are swindlers, and mentally unstable.

Salesmen thinks the rest of the company dead and lacing initiative.

My point is that selling is an EXPERT skill as much as the science of cryonics is.

The cryonicists came out with the correct science and accurate conclusions about saving lives ....and got only 260 people cryonically

with over 2000 signed up to get suspenededi in 60 YEARS!!!! and $100,000 to get frozen???

Get a life!

Hitler took over the Nazis party and signed up the whole of Germany in half that time with a rubbish product. (the jews even financed him in the early days).

He was an expert salesman and many if his techniques are studied and used routinely now in mass movements and mainstream politics.
Those and many more which the expert salesman will have under his belt.

If you unplug salesman from business, you have zero business.

But to reply specifically to your example, the best salesman around wouldn't sell a rubbish product.
They want the best product they can get and to sell it off the face of the earth, and to know that when the client has bought it the client is enormously benefited.

The difficult area for most is understanding that many clients dont know they need the product: they cant...it's too complex. So you get them signed up and let them realize what a fantastic and wise move they've made later.

They other view...informed consent is naive. Doctors dont use it when committing a mentally ill person for treatment, because the client is incapable of knowing they need psychiatry.

How many hundreds of millions have died because the cryonics movements have not employed expert salesmen to electrify the world? How can people sleep with that genocide on their conscience?

You can sell anything.

But to sell from moral high ground is terrifying to watch. Altruism is programmed in by evolution so no-one could refuse the pitch. That's why evangelism is so easy.

Self-interest is even easier.

Cryonicists can stay a cool elite writing academic papers 3 people flick through, or get out on the street like the Christians and Jews for Jesus and sell suspension for $1000.

The target shouldn't be another ten people suspended this year,

but TEN MILLION SIGNED UP BY JUNE.

With that $10 Billion budget you can honor the commitment to suspend people for $1000.


about 3.30

[Julia36]

Different audience and context, though LG influenced Hitler dramatically



These speakers are salesmen.

the great salesman when he sells his product pursues it's close (closing doesn't mean getting a contract though weak salesman think so) after the fact

eg Stalin and the President discredited the Germans at Nuremberg after Germany's defeat

Edited by Innocent, 14 February 2014 - 11:50 PM.