Protein Identified That Can Lengthen Our Life? - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Programmer;34931162][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_uploading"]Best way to live forever.[/URL][/QUOTE] Not really, you're just making a backup of your mind, you're consciousness wouldn't be transferred.

[QUOTE=Sickle;34920979]There's a whole fucking galaxy out there. Let people have their wish. [editline]29th February 2012[/editline] This type of shit ALWAYS disappears. Especially the life extension stuff.[/QUOTE] You know, they have to further test, research and make this applicable to use on Humans.

[QUOTE=Ardosos;34921007]I don't see very much tillable land, or drinkable water in that picture.[/QUOTE] Infrastructure :eng101: And tech. [editline]29th February 2012[/editline] And Siberia.

To get more educated on this subject I recommend the following videos: Cynthia Kenyon: Experiments that hint of longer lives [QUOTE]What controls aging? Biochemist Cynthia Kenyon has found a simple genetic mutation that can double the lifespan of a simple worm, C. elegans. The lessons from that discovery, and others, are pointing to how we might one day significantly extend youthful human life. When it comes to aging well, having “good genes” (or rather, mutant ones) is key, says Cynthia Kenyon. She unlocked the genetic secret of longevity in roundworms — and now she’s working to do the same for humans. [video=youtube;V48M5j-6zdE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V48M5j-6zdE[/video] [/QUOTE] Aubrey de Grey says we can avoid aging [QUOTE]Cambridge researcher Aubrey de Grey argues that aging is merely a disease -- and a curable one at that. Humans age in seven basic ways, he says, all of which can be averted. Aubrey de Grey, British researcher on aging, claims he has drawn a roadmap to defeat biological aging. He provocatively proposes that the first human beings who will live to 1,000 years old have already been born [video=youtube;8iYpxRXlboQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iYpxRXlboQ[/video][/QUOTE]

Didn't they say something similar about baked beans once if i remember?

[QUOTE=Slight;34922231]Did you really just denounce over population as an issue by arguing the fact that deserts exist? Hahaha? [/QUOTE] Egypt was built on a desert. They've been doing fine for over two thousand years. Except the riots and shitty leaders that is. If people were less greedy we could build shit in such areas with no problem, deliver resources from nearby places or drill for water. There's a lot of empty land that can be made habitable with a bit of effort, but capitalism says no.

[QUOTE=Sickle;34921339]Bahahahaha. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Countries_by_population_density.svg/800px-Countries_by_population_density.svg.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] You're not factoring in people's ecological footprint (which is 4-8 km^2 for the average western (1st world) inhabitant), which already is larger than our planet, and this is when there's still a lot of 3rd world countries. Imagine 6 billion people living at our standards, it'd be unsustainable with our current way of collecting and processing resources. Thinking that every person just requires 10 square meters of physical "room" to sustain him/herself is just plain dumb. Sure there's lots of deserts out there but there's a reason they're not inhabited... Also don't forget that even though Egypt was built in a desert, it was very dependent on the Nile and it's yearly overflowing (which isn't happening these days due to hydroelectric powerplants etc.) You could have a lot more people on this earth but that requires serious reforms concerning infrastructure, waste processing, agriculture, ...

[QUOTE=Number-41;34931661]You're not factoring in people's ecological footprint (which is 4-8 km^2 for the average western (1st world) inhabitant), which already is larger than our planet, and this is when there's still a lot of 3rd world countries. Imagine 6 billion people living at our standards, it'd be unsustainable with our current way of collecting and processing resources.[/QUOTE]Maybe people will actually get smarter when that happens. Still doesn't mean we should stop progress cause people live dirty. If our mind will be our doom, so be it.

[QUOTE=Number-41;34931661]You're not factoring in people's ecological footprint (which is 4-8 km^2 for the average western (1st world) inhabitant), which already is larger than our planet, and this is when there's still a lot of 3rd world countries. Imagine 6 billion people living at our standards, it'd be unsustainable with our current way of collecting and processing resources.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure the more our society evolves our farming, living, and ecological effects evolve too. It would be safe to say with people living hundreds of years then our habits of how we address land, farms, and space would also change

What's good is that scientists won't die as soon.

Honestly, the idea that people think these advances shouldn't come about due to overpopulation and whatnot sicken me. This is more of a boon than a bane, if there are issues we will work them out afterwards.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;34931747]Pretty sure the more our society evolves our farming, living, and ecological effects evolve too. It would be safe to say with people living hundreds of years then our habits of how we address land, farms, and space would also change[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/"]And China is a great example of ecological impacts diminishing as their life standard becomes better (or rather, having their industrial revolution)? [/URL] I doubt any of the developing countries are worried about the climate, not with the current global hypocritical mentality of the west (i.e. everyone yapping about climate taxes while not doing anything themselves). There's a big chance that it'll all be too late when we realise we've screwed over our planet.

[QUOTE=Number-41;34931876] There's a big chance that it'll all be too late when we realise we've screwed over our planet.[/QUOTE] Nah. The only thing we can screw is us. Planet is just fine, it's the people who are screwed.

It'd be funny if we'd all overcome these problems (no nuclear wars, no glaciers melting, ... ) and then a meteor destroys everything :v: [editline]29th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=AceOfDivine;34931720][U]Maybe people will actually get smarter[/U] when that happens. Still doesn't mean we should stop progress cause people live dirty. If our mind will be our doom, so be it.[/QUOTE] That's not very safe to assume imho

[QUOTE=Number-41;34931987] That's not very safe to assume imho[/QUOTE] As I said, if our mind will doom us, so be it. You can't move on without taking risk.

I'm cool with dying at 100 or so. I think by that time I'll have done my share in the world.

Yes.. Living longer would be nice... But what about UPLOADING BRAINS INTO COMPUTERS! That would be much better, as all organic failures are taken out. (But too bad this is very hard to do, and may even 'kill' you and just make a 'clone' like teleportation. Shit would be cool though, no?) Just make sure you have a good source of power, and some way to interface with the world (Robots remotely controlled that have human-like features would work) and you are all set to live for a long time. Better yet, space travel is slightly more feasibly because 100 years isn't a lifetime. But back to the this is hard to do part... Oh well, a man can dream.

[QUOTE=Gnomical;34933303]Yes.. Living longer would be nice... But what about UPLOADING BRAINS INTO COMPUTERS! That would be much better, as all organic failures are taken out. (But too bad this is very hard to do, and may even 'kill' you and just make a 'clone' like teleportation. Shit would be cool though, no?) Just make sure you have a good source of power, and some way to interface with the world (Robots remotely controlled that have human-like features would work) and you are all set to live for a long time. Better yet, space travel is slightly more feasibly because 100 years isn't a lifetime. But back to the this is hard to do part... Oh well, a man can dream.[/QUOTE] I prefer the whole stem cell/nanobot fabricators implanted into you that restore your body all the time.

[QUOTE=Viper_;34920965]I don't think I'll ever understand the people who are fine with just dying one day.[/QUOTE] I don't think i'll understand the people who want to live forever.

This will give people a longer life span and we can avoid death another day if that is your wish. But it's not a reason to give birth and overpopulate the planet and bring other people into this environment to also try and avoid, something that will inevitably happen. It is highly unresourceful to societies welfare also. If you truly want to avoid death for everybody, you do it by not imposing it on someone else by not bringing them into existance in the first place.

Yeah, it's called telomerase.

Man, the transhumanists are going to love this if her dissertation isn't picked apart by the scientific community.

Should I make a transhumanist megathread? So many people in this thread have common misconceptions, and I have a lot of knowledge in the area (both practical and theoretical). I've read many books and articles. What some and most of you guys have been saying has been totally in the wrong direction. Not that I'm making an accusation. I'm thinking about doing it.

[QUOTE=Roof;34922468]What extending life spans doesn't mean you won't die[/quote] I thought your post was about extending life to huge amounts of time... which would have the same effect. [QUOTE=Roof;34922468]and what's this about not existing this statement was really not thought about.[/QUOTE] What's there to think about? Death is significant was my point. Death is a part of evolution and without it there would be no evolution and hence no life... [QUOTE=Sottalytober;34922262]I can give you a city or a forest as well. Any ecosystem actually[/QUOTE] Can you give me a point instead? Overpopulation will be an issue in our future (within a few hundred years). It's a fact. Ecological capacity, which doesn't just include space, is what we're reaching.

[QUOTE=Slight;34940199]I thought your post was about extending life to huge amounts of time... which would have the same effect. What's there to think about? Death is significant was my point. Death is a part of evolution and without it there would be no evolution and hence no life...[/QUOTE] From our point of view evolution happens so slowly it's not worth thinking about when considering human immortality. We can evolve ourselves if need be.

I really don't expect an eventual anti-aging cure costing less than a million or two €. Over population wouldn't be as much of a problem when only a tiny part of the population can afford it.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;34933481]I don't think i'll understand the people who want to live forever.[/QUOTE] Being limited by time is a horrifying thought IMO.

[QUOTE=LifeIsGood;34920633]I don't want to live that old, honestly. Everything would hurt and I just generally don't want to see myself falling apart every morning knowing I might have another 50 or 100 years of this to go.[/QUOTE] I see something like[I] Ghost in the Shell [/I]becoming reality. Body falling apart? Get a new one. :v:

Hopefully if people can live longer they'll be more motivated into further expanding humanity's best interests. For one thing if people aren't dying as much we may be forced into space exploration, and if people can live to the point where their bodies become useless they may be required to modify or augment it. On the one hand I want both these things to become a reality some day, and I also want people to lead better, fuller lives. On the other, I worry what would happen if neither of these things are not accomplished.

[QUOTE=TehDoctorz;34937875]Should I make a transhumanist megathread? So many people in this thread have common misconceptions, and I have a lot of knowledge in the area (both practical and theoretical). I've read many books and articles. What some and most of you guys have been saying has been totally in the wrong direction. Not that I'm making an accusation. I'm thinking about doing it.[/QUOTE] Would be a good idea if you ask me