[removed]

how is that even remotely anarchy? it's authoritarianism. it's HOW they make money. they go strong arm companies. russia sent KGB (FSB, but let's be real here) into companies and forced them to sign them over to government officials at gunpoint. go watch a documentary on the magnitsky thing if you haven't. it's insane. the magnitsky act that the UN used to sanction russia came from the name of the lawyer that was killed by the Kremlin for defending an American businessman that they tried to do the same thing to, but luckily he was smarter than them. unfortunately the brave russian lawyer died for his bravery. trump would do the same crap here. he was already doing shady shit WHILE in office. like forced govt. trips to stay in his hotels, and then price gouged them more than their normal price. that goes beyond conflict of interest. but I digress

I'm not saying there isn't any truth to some of what you said, as there is certainly a lot of corrupt lobbying going on, as we know large corps basically have a huge influence on politics. but that doesn't excuse the ONE party that is openly trying to burn the country and democracy to the ground while pulling a russia and falsely trying to redirect the blame

Its the beginning of the research and the goal would be to do the equivalent. Plus 7% of 75 is about 5 years, that's not a bad start

I might finally be able to save enough for retirement if I have eighty working years ahead of me instead of forty.

Can’t make an omelette with breaking a few eggs! -Mad Scientists

I actually think it has the possibility of swinging the other way (at least in some areas).

Content being read and judged more critically, to select the gems among the sea of drivel (which humans are quite capable of producing without the assistance of AI)

This article is about the editors attempts to block AI content, it’s hard to see how a publication will be able to curate high quality content without a bit of my theory playing out.

[removed]

Americans are packed into cities too, though maybe not to the same degree. A lot of America is still just wilderness.

I'm sure some billionaires are already using the stuff

Well...what I really want is to get my 20s back. A do-over. Extra years would be nice, but I don't love the idea of finding a way to only slow the aging process just to watch my body deteriorate more gradually than I expected (it's already a fair ways into the process). So if it's just that, I'm only mildly interested.

It's a different study, but you might have heard about one where they basically made mice young again. You're right, a big question mark, whatever they come up with, is how we die instead. We'll have to see what role cancer and accidents play. Although, we're working on curing cancer, and automobiles, for example, are way safer than when I was born. There are car models whose rate of death is statistically zero. It's so much safer to get in an accident than it used to be.

And, as I said, we'll have to see who actually opts for treatments. Fingers crossed that right-wing Christians would rather die, but they come up with those beliefs post hoc. They certainly get chemotherapy for their cancer to delay going to heaven.

seems to be a big mis conception amongst new comers to the world of anti aging, but we are not trying to simply slow your death, but reverse it. Unless you change the underlying mechanism in a fetus you will age. However, reversing your age over and over again is the idea.

you’re right, only billionaires have iphones, billionaires have a piece of technology stronger than every computer combined in 1970 in their pocket, screw them.

A hot take, but I agree. All it means is that you'll be slaving away for twice as many years.

The rich folk are probably licking their chops and rubbing their hands together. Boneappletea.

Ah yes, lets give the prototype AI access to drones. Just what 2023 needs to beat the last few years.

That's because you don't understand the innuendo. Yet.

And so it begins, the flood of cheap content that will bury human made content in a morass of garbage until we won’t know what’s fake or real. All to cheers and applause of what a brilliant future we are creating….

Quantum immortality

>due to AI writers

No. It's due to many idiots using a single "AI writer".

First people to benefit will be the ultra rich. Let’s be real, None of us normies will ever really be able to afford the treatment; and so the rich will just get richer because they’ll never die, and never have to pass on their wealth through death and inheritance taxes. Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to toil and die.

EDIT: I find it funny that people downvote this, you know damn well I’m right lol. This treatment will be expensive as all hell, and whatever company that’s doing it will want to earn every dollar they can

You start messing with cell longevity and you're asking to have cancer.

We have people that start fist fights in the supermarket parking lot, kill others because they think someone looked at them wrong, and leaders of nations that execute generals and commit genocide against it's own citizens. How much more irrational or illogical could an AI be? Humanity ain't setting very high standards here!

Why does cancer always needs to ruin good things?

Fuck it, they hit everyone with jabs already, let's live for fucking ever!!!?

This is so wholesome but I can't figure out why.

I think it depends rather highly on how the causes of death are impacted, and the nature of the extension.

If it's what I think it is, it's more or less stretching out the body's decay, rather than just adding a number of years in a specific physical state. So people that randomly die at any point after 50 are still going to, rather than living forever. That's an issue for a far, far improved version of this treatment, if it's ever possible.

Going by the 7% figure in the study, 7 years assuming a lifespan of 100 would figure into maybe 3 or 4 at an optimal age if applied early enough, and wouldn't really impact average society beyond a slight increase across the board. It's not exactly an immediate exponential increase, though it could snowball into one.

Then again, with the average age of parents steadily rising, it might not seriously impact birthrate at all.