I remember my great-grandfathers: Gilbert, Clyde, Coit, and Sam. They mean something to me because I would not be me if they weren't them. Something would be different if their lives were different. There are connections. Life continues.
Yes, we should live our lives not worried about appearances to others. Most of our accomplishments will be fleeting at best, but the lives we live influence our children and our grandchildren, and that influence passes along, whether they remember my name - because of a shared passion for family genealogy - or not.
This is the most depressing comment in the thread.
It's not about how long we live, it's about how long we live while we are in our prime... Gen 1 tech issues... we are extending lives, we aren't really extending prime years... so all we're doing is stretching out that twilight-period. Every time I visit my 97 year-old grandparents they say things like, "I pray I'll go soon..."
I'd rather just go quick at 50 than prolong my years after 70. The thought of perpetually being old and frail sounds like some sort of torture. And while it may be appealing to say, "I'd like to stay 21 forever..." 21 year-olds tend to be idiots and the thought of having "21 year-old problems" forever sounds like a whole other form of torture.
With today's networked data, assuming enough technological acceleration that all the web content gets archived, your Tweets, posts, and other writings could be available indefinitely. Not so sure that that's a good thing.
Even contemporary fame and success is no guarantee of being remembered. I've stumbled across Wikipedia articles on countless authors who were hugely successful in the 19th and early 20th century, often publishing dozens of widely-read books, but who are already almost entirely forgotten. I'm sure they imagined they had done enough to secure a personal legacy, but it seems not.
That's one thing that has always bothered me about grave yards: how little the people end up leaving behind. An entire life gets reduced to a few meaningless facts about a person that don't really tell us anything about who they were. It would kind of be nice in that sense if there was more information available about a person to perhaps leave something behind. Maybe some wisdom or entertaining historical facts from the person... I dunno.
This is somewhat of a joke but: put sha256 hashes on grave stones that identify contracts on a decentralized cloud storage system and then fund them with enough coins to enforce their content for the next 1000 years. Technically you could use time-lock encryption to reveal progressive challenges to the hosting nodes to prove that the content still exists overtime so that an autonomous system that enforces content could be made (existing protocols somewhat depend on an active system to prove that the content still exists but this is getting a bit technical now... Or otherwise just embed content into a blockchain if its small enough.)
I guess there is also tomb stones that have QR codes on them that let you do something similar with an app but there's no guarantee that the company will still be around in the next 100 years. With a self-organising autonomous storage system you could have a way to intelligently reallocate content without any kind of human intervention. So that overtime if the people hosting content go down or decide to stop doing it, the storage contracts can be dynamically reallocated to new nodes who will collect fees from the contracts.
Much like a DropBox that never dies - it would far outlive anyone today and so long as the funds for hosting content still existed on some blockchain - so too would the content. And that my friends, is why blockchains are over-hyped and stupid. LMAO, blockchains for dead people? Did you really buy that. I mean, seriously.
The problem is not that information can't be persisted: diaries etc have been around for a long time. The problem is that there is nobody left who will care about a person they've never even met.
I recently tried looking up some relatives about 5 generations back. If you average 2 kids each then in 5 generations you have 40 or so living descendants who may be curious. It was interesting because one of them wrote a family history in fairly literary form - bit Jane Austen in style. Not sure we would have bothered if it was just diaries.
Many times, in my career while negotiating something with another party I've said, "Let's get this fixed, it won't mean much to either of us in 50 years and in 100 nobody will remember either of us."
I've managed to solve some pretty hairy problems saying that, the other party usually pauses and realizes the futility of our disagreement and we work something out.
Call me morbid but I started saying that when I was 18 years old.
I also say, "I raise my kids for me to die". It shocks people when I say it but what parent wants to outlive their children? Honestly my goal is to teach them how to make good decisions and find what feeds their soul for their short stay in this world.
I’ve read many things over the years about the deep need for humans to somehow push death out beyond their consciousness because otherwise it would destroy them to think every day could be the end of them.
I don’t see it that way, I feel like I borrowed these atoms my body is assembled from and it’s my goal to use them to learn, love and enjoy the amazing reality we live in every day. Today could be my last, so what, at some point I must give my atoms back to the universe for whatever purpose they find in the future. Today they’re mine, and I’m happy to have them just a bit longer to discover a tiny bit more about our existence and the people around us all.
It's not morbid, but sensible. No-one gets out of life alive.
An unexpected death in my immediate family several years ago helped me realize how underprepared most of us are for death; for all the people and living things around us to die. Rather than be caught surprised, I've tried to remember that life can end in any moment, and it's best to make the most of things (and borrowed atoms, as you say) while you can.
Indeed, losing a loved one used to be common, now it's exceptional. One thing that struck me when reading Dickens was how prominent death was. Everyone had family members who'd died. Mothers, fathers, children, siblings. I think almost universally in the current era we take life and health for granted. The advent of antibiotics and sanitation has really had a profound effect. We know this, but we don't know this.
On the one hand, some one realizing the seeming meaninglessness of existence is banal. This is well trod ground for many after all. But on the other hand it's also a an xkcd 1053[1] privilege to be a part of the authors epiphany.
Personally, for myself, the question of 'what legacy shall I leave?' resulted in finally settling down and having children of my own. I felt like I received an immense gift of a kind, warm, and loving home. I seek to continue that legacy with my own family. Because in the end, that's all most can hope to do; be a positive influence on the generations to come.
> at some point I must give my atoms back to the universe for whatever purpose they find in the future
Nitpick: you're already giving back everyday a fairly high amount of atoms to the universe. Actually, it looks like a hight percentage of your original atoms have already been replaced many times [0].
Living your life with a goal to be remembered in 100 years sounds more like living life to impress people you aren't even sure will regard what you are doing as important. Politicians, whether they changed the world for good or bad, are more likely to be remembered that 99% of who are contributing positively to this world.
If any software I work on today survives that long without any major rewrites I just hope they are not yelling and cursing my name because I missed a 100 year old bug.
From the epilogue of Barry Lyndon: "It was in the reign of George III that the aforesaid personages lived and quarreled; good or bad, handsome or ugly, rich or poor, they are all equal now."
In many countries, cemeteries aren't managed so well as this one in Sweden. I've toured my share, and recall seeing graves that were hundreds of years old. In some places, thousands.
I sometimes pay attention to the sheer number of people I cross paths with in life, and think: see this person going by in their car, or that guy jogging up the street. I know almost nothing about what their life has been about, what struggles they've faced, what successes they've had, what it was like for them growing up, what are they thinking and feeling right now. I'd wager that the large majority of people out there, I know nothing about and anything they've gone through hasn't even crossed my mind. So most don't even need to be gone 100 years, to be largely unknown on an intimate level except to a relatively small circle of people.
I can find myself believing (perhaps due to a survival instinct) that what I believe, think, do, etc matter greatly. The truth is, those things matter to me and perhaps several others in my close circle. Sure, I can do things to engage in greater society and provide a positive influence on others. That doesn't change the fact that, in all likelihood, a large portion of the world isn't even aware of or concerned much about my existence.
I like a quote from the book of the samurai (hagakure) that says: "this world is vanity indeed. People always forget this." I've made up how important things are and probably will continue to as part of human nature. So I'll try to have a life I can appreciate and enjoy while it's here, because I want to -- and most other people won't even notice, much less care, if I do.
Death makes life fair because we all end up with nothing. The universe itself won't last forever. In terms of justice and equality, this is very comforting.
I don't understand all these people who are funding research to cure death. Even if you manage to cure natural death, you definitely won't be able to cure occupational death.
> I don't understand all these people who are funding research to cure death.
It's very simple: they don't want to die. They're enjoying life, and death is the specter which threatens to halt that enjoyment. They are also in the privileged position of having money to throw at the problem.
In someone's 30's and 40's, the biggest fear is of death as a general evil to be conquered. I wonder how the focuses of these groups will change over time; will they change their focus from death in general to particular symptoms of aging in particular?
Will their focus move to curing cancer if they get cancer? How about preventing Alzheimer's when their loved ones no longer remember them? Regeneration of cartilage when they can no longer walk around pain free? And so forth...
I'm curious what the policies are for the persistence of cemetery plots in different areas. I thankfully have had no personal interaction with the funeral industry yet, but the article's matter-of-fact mentioning of gravestones being uprooted and hauled elsewhere (or even destroyed) after some period of inactivity seemed hideous to me. A bit of research ( http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2248/do-cemetery-pl... ) suggests that the US (where I reside) seems to have more permanence in burial plots than Europe does. I suppose it makes sense given the limitations of space and accumulated time that Europe has had to deal with as opposed to the US, but there is something aesthetically horrifying to me about the idea of evicting dead bodies for failure to "pay rent." Moving graves for new development is one thing, but for it to be a policy of an active cemetery seems like such an alien concept.
In a similar way, I've found myself less happy with the idea of modern cremation the more I learn about it. The mental picture of "body goes into the fire, ashes come out of the fire" seemed beautiful, but the use of the cremulator ( essentially a blender to crush up all the bits of bone that didn't turn to ashes, as seen in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJTclbBKxKk ) gives me pause. It may be an irrational thought in our modern materialistic world, but that last act of push-button pulverization feels violent and overly industrial. Perhaps embalming is not much better, but at least that connects with a familiar historical tradition. I wonder how far back the use of cremulation in cremation goes -- in modern times can you request that your cremation keeps the bits of bones "unprocessed"?
Is it possible to remember someone without having shared experiences with that person?
I don't think so.
Otherwise you're just remembering a short list of their most significant accomplishments and not really the person themselves.
So if no one is alive who interacted with me in 100 years, then, by definition, no one will remember me. A few people might recollect my accomplishments, but it will only have been done through 3rd party accounts and documents like my notes/books or photographs.
52 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 110 ms ] threadWhat a way to start my morning.
For you, this still doesn't matter as you are still dead.
http://walterbright.com/trip/chas.html
I suppose the stuff I post on the internet will last forever :-)
Your posts, too, shall pass.
http://www.oocities.org/
(cries in horror and runs away)
Yes, we should live our lives not worried about appearances to others. Most of our accomplishments will be fleeting at best, but the lives we live influence our children and our grandchildren, and that influence passes along, whether they remember my name - because of a shared passion for family genealogy - or not.
It's not about how long we live, it's about how long we live while we are in our prime... Gen 1 tech issues... we are extending lives, we aren't really extending prime years... so all we're doing is stretching out that twilight-period. Every time I visit my 97 year-old grandparents they say things like, "I pray I'll go soon..."
I'd rather just go quick at 50 than prolong my years after 70. The thought of perpetually being old and frail sounds like some sort of torture. And while it may be appealing to say, "I'd like to stay 21 forever..." 21 year-olds tend to be idiots and the thought of having "21 year-old problems" forever sounds like a whole other form of torture.
Let's say there's tech to freeze your age at whatever point you like. Where would you want it to be frozen?
Why don't you leave that decision for 50-year-old you? Maybe they will disagree.
This is somewhat of a joke but: put sha256 hashes on grave stones that identify contracts on a decentralized cloud storage system and then fund them with enough coins to enforce their content for the next 1000 years. Technically you could use time-lock encryption to reveal progressive challenges to the hosting nodes to prove that the content still exists overtime so that an autonomous system that enforces content could be made (existing protocols somewhat depend on an active system to prove that the content still exists but this is getting a bit technical now... Or otherwise just embed content into a blockchain if its small enough.)
I guess there is also tomb stones that have QR codes on them that let you do something similar with an app but there's no guarantee that the company will still be around in the next 100 years. With a self-organising autonomous storage system you could have a way to intelligently reallocate content without any kind of human intervention. So that overtime if the people hosting content go down or decide to stop doing it, the storage contracts can be dynamically reallocated to new nodes who will collect fees from the contracts.
Much like a DropBox that never dies - it would far outlive anyone today and so long as the funds for hosting content still existed on some blockchain - so too would the content. And that my friends, is why blockchains are over-hyped and stupid. LMAO, blockchains for dead people? Did you really buy that. I mean, seriously.
http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2015004_cuneiform.pdf
I've managed to solve some pretty hairy problems saying that, the other party usually pauses and realizes the futility of our disagreement and we work something out.
Call me morbid but I started saying that when I was 18 years old.
I also say, "I raise my kids for me to die". It shocks people when I say it but what parent wants to outlive their children? Honestly my goal is to teach them how to make good decisions and find what feeds their soul for their short stay in this world.
I’ve read many things over the years about the deep need for humans to somehow push death out beyond their consciousness because otherwise it would destroy them to think every day could be the end of them.
I don’t see it that way, I feel like I borrowed these atoms my body is assembled from and it’s my goal to use them to learn, love and enjoy the amazing reality we live in every day. Today could be my last, so what, at some point I must give my atoms back to the universe for whatever purpose they find in the future. Today they’re mine, and I’m happy to have them just a bit longer to discover a tiny bit more about our existence and the people around us all.
An unexpected death in my immediate family several years ago helped me realize how underprepared most of us are for death; for all the people and living things around us to die. Rather than be caught surprised, I've tried to remember that life can end in any moment, and it's best to make the most of things (and borrowed atoms, as you say) while you can.
On the one hand, some one realizing the seeming meaninglessness of existence is banal. This is well trod ground for many after all. But on the other hand it's also a an xkcd 1053[1] privilege to be a part of the authors epiphany.
Personally, for myself, the question of 'what legacy shall I leave?' resulted in finally settling down and having children of my own. I felt like I received an immense gift of a kind, warm, and loving home. I seek to continue that legacy with my own family. Because in the end, that's all most can hope to do; be a positive influence on the generations to come.
[1] https://xkcd.com/1053/
Nitpick: you're already giving back everyday a fairly high amount of atoms to the universe. Actually, it looks like a hight percentage of your original atoms have already been replaced many times [0].
[0] http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?story...
I need to remember this when I'm freaking out about an interview or a presentation.
Even within your family it is hard to remember people after a couple of generations.
Who cares? I don't.
It's like discussing life after death. I'm fine with just this one.
Not that it matters, of course.
I can find myself believing (perhaps due to a survival instinct) that what I believe, think, do, etc matter greatly. The truth is, those things matter to me and perhaps several others in my close circle. Sure, I can do things to engage in greater society and provide a positive influence on others. That doesn't change the fact that, in all likelihood, a large portion of the world isn't even aware of or concerned much about my existence.
I like a quote from the book of the samurai (hagakure) that says: "this world is vanity indeed. People always forget this." I've made up how important things are and probably will continue to as part of human nature. So I'll try to have a life I can appreciate and enjoy while it's here, because I want to -- and most other people won't even notice, much less care, if I do.
I don't understand all these people who are funding research to cure death. Even if you manage to cure natural death, you definitely won't be able to cure occupational death.
It's very simple: they don't want to die. They're enjoying life, and death is the specter which threatens to halt that enjoyment. They are also in the privileged position of having money to throw at the problem.
In someone's 30's and 40's, the biggest fear is of death as a general evil to be conquered. I wonder how the focuses of these groups will change over time; will they change their focus from death in general to particular symptoms of aging in particular?
Will their focus move to curing cancer if they get cancer? How about preventing Alzheimer's when their loved ones no longer remember them? Regeneration of cartilage when they can no longer walk around pain free? And so forth...
In a similar way, I've found myself less happy with the idea of modern cremation the more I learn about it. The mental picture of "body goes into the fire, ashes come out of the fire" seemed beautiful, but the use of the cremulator ( essentially a blender to crush up all the bits of bone that didn't turn to ashes, as seen in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJTclbBKxKk ) gives me pause. It may be an irrational thought in our modern materialistic world, but that last act of push-button pulverization feels violent and overly industrial. Perhaps embalming is not much better, but at least that connects with a familiar historical tradition. I wonder how far back the use of cremulation in cremation goes -- in modern times can you request that your cremation keeps the bits of bones "unprocessed"?
I don't think so.
Otherwise you're just remembering a short list of their most significant accomplishments and not really the person themselves.
So if no one is alive who interacted with me in 100 years, then, by definition, no one will remember me. A few people might recollect my accomplishments, but it will only have been done through 3rd party accounts and documents like my notes/books or photographs.