One could argue that if we are smart enough to make this work, we could be smart enough to have the machines take over as well but I am not holding my breath :)
Most people could easily live in shape until their natural limit and here we are with half the population obese and not able to run 100 meters in their 30s and some people who have never been physically able to do a single pull up in their entire existence
Doing simple actions right now could easily extend your health span by 20 years, it doesn't get closer to a magic pill
What's the point of living to even 70 if by your 40s you're already a fat useless excuse of a human being. We have an incredible hardware run with absolute shit tier software that's the problem
Here’s the erudite Socrates version: "It is a disgrace to grow old through sheer carelessness before seeing what manner of man you may become by developing your bodily strength and beauty to their highest limit."
I thought about rewriting that part for a while and couldn't come up with a better version. I'm not even saying it with anger, more with sadness to be honest. I wish people could see how capable their body is and how relatively easy it is to upgrade oneself.
I've seen friends and family members let themselves rot and wonder why they always feel like shit, it's just plain sad, so much long term happiness wasted for short time joys.
It's never too late to turn around either, my gf's dad is in his 60s and lost 20kg in a few months because we motivated him. He had trouble walking because of painful knees for years and what a miracle!!! he's cured now, all it took is eating a bit less.
> Most people could easily live in shape until their natural limit and here we are with half the population obese and not able to run 100 meters in their 30s and some people who have never been physically able to do a single pull up in their entire existence
That's due to excess sugars in our food causing obesity, not the "laziness" of the population. If one person can't control their weight, sure, that might be an example of laziness, but if a population as a whole has increased obesity rates, it's time to look at the structural societal issues that brought about that effect.
... or paid to relocate individuals to places with houses. People dont like to talk about all the empty houses in less than desirable places. Rather, state governments and large businesses talk about needing to build housing everywhere cuz money.
If there are more people in a place, there will be more demand for workers in the place to support the people, no?
If this is not sufficient we need to look at making places less dependent on centralized specialist geographic areas, because that approach does not scale well.
You certainly can, thats what subsidies are for. Put the jobs back, incentivize corporations to revamp decrepit towns. Like Klamath, a beautiful old city that fell into disrepair because logging and mining gone ... people didnt leave because it was unlivable. Tax breaks for revitalizing a town and tariffs for any virgin ground broken.
I know this is borderline ad hominem, but your arguments feel so far from reality that it's hard to discuss in any detail.
Yes, worker demand would go up, but that would only be for a portion of jobs. Imagine you have a small, desktop ant farm with fixed supply of food. You add an additional 10x ants to that farm. Sure, some of the new ants will collect food for the queen, but what do the rest of the ants do? The colony doesn't have any additional food source, they were already surviving with 10x less ants.
Likewise, whether or not centralized geographic areas scale well doesn't really matter. What matters is how all other options scale - and they scale worse.
----
I've lived in rural America for the past decade for my wife's job. I've been fortunate to be able to work remotely, but without that I'd likely be unemployed or far underemployed. There just aren't job opportunities for me in small towns.
Plenty of house are available in places with shrinking economies. Most folks would rather live where jobs are available. How does shipping people to tiny towns with no job prospects help anybody?
Not really, fertility rate is going down worldwide regardless of housing costs. Turns out rich families don't need or want as many children as those working the farm.
49 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 318 ms ] threadAdding 10 years to retirement and 30 years to life span means maybe 15 years living with severe physical and mental degradation.
So even if we retire at 90, pension funds will become unsustainable.
I wouldn't want to be 120, looking at folks who are 90. But being youthful till 120 or even until I choose it's time? That would be quite lovely.
Doing simple actions right now could easily extend your health span by 20 years, it doesn't get closer to a magic pill
What's the point of living to even 70 if by your 40s you're already a fat useless excuse of a human being. We have an incredible hardware run with absolute shit tier software that's the problem
I've seen friends and family members let themselves rot and wonder why they always feel like shit, it's just plain sad, so much long term happiness wasted for short time joys.
It's never too late to turn around either, my gf's dad is in his 60s and lost 20kg in a few months because we motivated him. He had trouble walking because of painful knees for years and what a miracle!!! he's cured now, all it took is eating a bit less.
That's due to excess sugars in our food causing obesity, not the "laziness" of the population. If one person can't control their weight, sure, that might be an example of laziness, but if a population as a whole has increased obesity rates, it's time to look at the structural societal issues that brought about that effect.
If this is not sufficient we need to look at making places less dependent on centralized specialist geographic areas, because that approach does not scale well.
Yes, worker demand would go up, but that would only be for a portion of jobs. Imagine you have a small, desktop ant farm with fixed supply of food. You add an additional 10x ants to that farm. Sure, some of the new ants will collect food for the queen, but what do the rest of the ants do? The colony doesn't have any additional food source, they were already surviving with 10x less ants.
Likewise, whether or not centralized geographic areas scale well doesn't really matter. What matters is how all other options scale - and they scale worse.
----
I've lived in rural America for the past decade for my wife's job. I've been fortunate to be able to work remotely, but without that I'd likely be unemployed or far underemployed. There just aren't job opportunities for me in small towns.
Not really, fertility rate is going down worldwide regardless of housing costs. Turns out rich families don't need or want as many children as those working the farm.
Larry Niven pointed out that societies with longer lifespans would become more risk averse as you have more to lose.
Conversely he also predicted greater rates of addiction.
https://youtu.be/FYr04ymjD1w?si=dd45tE7vKW6ZcIOw&t=224
The risk of death for human exponentially increase as you age, but it is constant for tortoise.