/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15413300
>it is
aging I mean.

>>15413300
>I don't really think humans deserve such a thing
That's not relevant to whether it's possible or not. The universe doesn't care about your feelings

>>15413300
in your lifetime, pseudo-immortality may possibly be achieved by letting an AI copy your personality, then sharing your experiences and memories for several years. when your body dies, the bot that's been with you all your life, through thick and thin, will carry on your consciousness as a sentient being.

>>15413300
Biological immortality is possible yes. We know of at least two species that are biologically immortal.

We prefer the term "life extension" around here. Immortality implies that death would become impossible. I won't say this is impossible, if consciousness can be reduced to a distinct pattern of energy, and if this energy pattern was able to transcend physical form, and if the universe does not have an ending in time then perhaps. Also assuming whatever form said energy pattern took was completely immune to damage both physical and exotic but... Life extension is far more plausible.

>>15413300
I don't know if it can be said that it's definitely possible but there's people working on it like Aubrey degray and David Sinclair and many others that are fairly optimistic it could happen in the coming decades. I doubt very much it will be some sudden discovery where there's a breakthrough that allows us to live indefinitely. It's much more likely that there will be a discovery to increase lifespan by say 50%. Then maybe a decade after that another 50%, and so on. It will be more of a gradual process. Evolution might lead to us living for thousands of years on its own without intervention anyway, we already live twice as long as the mammals we evolved from, pan chimps or whatever. I don't know why you'd think humans don't deserve it, that's like saying we don't deserve cancer treatments or blood pressure medicine or just medicine in general

>>>/lit/21974244
kys tranny

>>15413323
>We prefer the term "life extension" around here. Immortality implies that death would become impossible
Life extension is a better term yeah. I think immortality gets mixed up with invincibility though because an immortal person could still die from getting hit by a bus or whatever, immortal just means they don't die of natural causes

>>15413333
Ignore this tranny obsessed pedo loser

https://i.4cdn.org/sci/1683069093049690.jpg

>>15413339
Paranoid schizophrenic strikes again.

>>15413323
There are a lot of terms, and I think the one that people actually want is "healthspan". Lifespan can be artificially extended almost indefinitely already.

It's not really what we want, we want our brains and bodies to keep functioning as it does in our youth.

>>15413305
ok, is it possible or will you just have to accept the fact that you will inevitably die thanks to the way the universe works?
>>15413315
>the bot that's been with you all your life
then it won't be "me" and this is still in the realm of fantastical thinking.
>>15413318
which ones?
>>15413323
that's a whole lot of ifs. and what is this "life extension"? do you just mean medicine? because I'm not talking about that.
>>15413329
humans should accept death and not live in constant fear. Still, this is all highly improbable, and I don't think long lifespans are practical for energy-wasting species. IDK, maybe if you're a vegetable.
>>15413333
most of the people here seem to fall more hook line and sinker for sci-fi tropes like AI, a term that originated in sci-fi and was never properly defined. So now people keep pushing chatbots as "AI"
I'm would be more interested in stories that subvert these fantastical expectations by it all remaining in the realm of impossibility or an advanced civ getting conquered by subhuman savages because their society has neglected so many other things.
or maybe a story set millions of years in the future and we still don't have (sci-fi trope #13). I mean. people in the past thought up a bunch of ludicrous shit they thought would happen in the future, which we now know was a bit ridiculous in hindsight. People always mention only a handful of inventions that turned out to come to life (which in the end, are still vastly inferior to the original ideas) among the thousands of different ideas which have never come into being. And suffering is good for you.
>>15413337
you can't be obsessed with trannies, it's like being obsessed with door-to-door salesmen.

>>15413315
still, this post reminds me of a plot point in Book of the New Sun. Is consciousness just the memories and experiences we have? why did we decide the first decision we ever did?
Also, if time is eternal, does that mean that your essential being will reappear in the universe eventually?

>>15413300
>Do you think immortality is theoretically possible?
it's not only possible, you are already immortal whether you like it or not

>>15413300
The longer you live the less time you physically experience as seconds and minutes seem shorter to you. Eventually you would reach a point where years would fly past in moments and you wouldn’t experience anything so it would essentially be brain death.

>>15413463
I kinda already agree with this notion. >>15413460

>>15413468
good
because that means you are correct and in alignment with the truth and the facts of reality

>>15413300
Hi anon. I'm some one actually working on this. I'm a member of a research group (a rather junior member to be fair) that works on understanding and interfering with the mechanism of ageing.
To start us off, it IS theoretycally possible to significantly increase longevity. Research on this is ongoing in several labs all over the world, and there are several approaches. We know what things cause ageing, we just don't know which of the 9 key haulmarks of ageing are the most significant. There are currently two competing models, the oxidative stress model of ageing and the transposon model of ageing. The later seems to bo winnig so far, and it is what i too am working on.
A quick rundown of ageing: varius things cause DNA damage, like reactive oxygen species, copying errors, telomer degradation, transposon activity, transposase activity, etc... DNA damage then causes reduiced function of the proteome, which increases all sources of DNA damage, in a self streangthening process. This leads to stem cell exhaustion, breakdown of the immun system and cell-cell communication, acumulation of senescent cells, interfearence with housekeeping hormones like GH, all of which lead to the classical symptoms of ageing.
We posit that the key factor is the activity of younger transposon families. Transposons are evolutionary junk in our DNA which can like viruses use the regular mechanisms of cells to copy themselfes, but then insert themselfes into our DNA, causing exponentila mutagenezis. Many of the more intact ones code for transposase, an endonuclease, which in ofitslef is mutagenic. Targeting transposons is very hard because they are highly polymorphic, but we think we may have found a way, so in the comeing years we will see how much this contributes to ageing via a C. elegans longevity study. Hopefully we can beat the current record of an 8fold increase in lifespan.
For a more detailed explanation, ask away, or read the relevant literature.

Why do you feel the need to announce you are "from /lit/" you utter wanker. Go fuck yourself

>>15413305
True.
>>15413315
Irrelevant to the question of immortality. That being said, current estimates put human longevity increase to be possible in 7 years. I as some one working on it am however sceptical of this estimate, if the less popular synergy model of ageing is correct it could take several decades to fix.
>>15413318
We know of a lot more then that, entire families of species are biologycally immortal, such as most flatworms, acoels, and a number of hydra. They all have one thing incommon, activity of the PIWI piRNA pathway, which is responsible for silencing transposons. It is also active in immortal mamaian cell lines like the germline and cancers.
>>15413323
An interesting idea, but an abstraction far from what actual longevity research looks like. We examine the molecular pathways to see how the system breaks down and try to fix the problems. Realistically we will never be immortal, in the scientific literature it is either refered to as "healthy ageing" or 'increased longevity'.
>>15413329
>Aubrey degray and David Sinclair
Jesus fucking christ these people. No, they are not working on it, they are sharlatans. Aubry worked a bit on ROS moedl, but everything he says is like 20 years out of date. David did some decent work on apoptosis, but what he does now is take other peoples results and does basic rescue studies with them to get headlines, but adds virtually no value to the research. They are just the cunts who go infront of the media, they don't actually do much.
People like lopez-otin, gorbunova, brennecke, vellai, or kazazian have done far, far far more.
>>15413463
This is not science, it is phylosophy or religion.
>>15413466
What? I know of no such phenomenon. My girlfriend is a neurologist, i just asked her, and he knows of no such phenomenon. Can you give me some literature on it to read?

>>15413499
>David did some decent work on apoptosis, but what he does now is take other peoples results and does basic rescue studies with them to get headlines, but adds virtually no value to the research.
I have noticed this as well, kinda shitty because he is holding a position which could've been used by better men who would actually achieve things.

>>15413499
>This is not science, it is phylosophy or religion.
wrong

>>15413499
First of all, thank you very much for your informative effortposting. It's increasingly rare to see such quality posts on /sci/ these days.
>PIWI piRNA pathway, which is responsible for silencing transposons. It is also active in immortal mamaian cell lines like the germline and cancers.
Fascinating. Any review papers you would recommend on this topic?

Also does any group have plans to test some kind of lipid delivery of these strands in other species? Who can I fund in this area?

>>15413484
Because you are intellectual inferiors and need to be informed your intellectual superior is now and you need to respond to me with the appropriate amount of reverence and respect you filthy peasant

>>15413450
>is it possible or will you just have to accept the fact that you will inevitably die
Two different questions. Lifespan can be increased. You will still die eventually.
>>15413450
>then it won't be "me"
This. This is true. The question wasn't "will there be a good facsimile of me"
>which ones?
Hydra vulgaris, Schmidtea mediterranea
>Schmidtea mediterranea
There are several methods by which we can extend lifespan. Currently the record holder is modulation of the insulin-IGF pathway, which in the model organism C. elegans has rsulted in a 7-9 fold increase in lifespan. They normally live between 15-24 days depending on temperature. These transgenic animals live around 180 days. This ofcourse is not translatebale 1:1 to mammals or humans. But it is a very primitive aproach, ust a proof of concept. With specific silencing of certaine molecular mechanisms we could achieve much more, the experiments to do this are currently ongoing.
>humans should accept death and not live in constant fear.
I completely agree. This however has nothing to do with the science of it, or weather or not it's possible. Which it is.
> sci-fi tropes like AI
I completely agree with this part of the post. I think most people don't really understand what AI is. A neural network isn't even remotely like a brain.

>>15413512
How's that job hunt going /lit/fren?

>>15413514
>You will still die eventually.
incorrect
see: >>15413463

>>15413499
Largely I agree with you which is why life extension is the preferred term. I don't subscribe to the belief that immortality is possible by transferring to a computer and, as you say, concepts like transcending physical form seems more like fantasy given our current level of knowledge.

I had come to the conclusion that we would need to develop our understanding of protein folding to be able to properly combat all effects of aging, like reversing Alzheimer's or restoring collagen to remove wrinkles. Are you saying that if we end aging at the cellular level, the effects will pass on to the macro scale as well? Are you indicating that by preventing cells losing their effectiveness, our own cells will automatically repair age related health issues?

It's interesting to have someone stop by who seems to actually know what they are talking about. I wish I knew better questions to ask.

>>15413528
>concepts like transcending physical form seems more like fantasy given our current level of knowledge
except given everything we know about physics we know that the underlying quantum field will continue to fluctuate endlessly, so >>15413463 is unmistakably and undeniably true

>>15413528
>It's interesting to have someone stop by who seems to actually know what they are talking about.
they are a glorified mechanic
there's no point in worrying about your body any more than you should worry about your clothes, when the body breaks down you just get a new one, simple as

>>15413535
I'll meet you halfway and admit that I believe in the soul. I can also concede that continuity of consciousness is tenuous even within our own mind. For example if I suffer a traumatic concussion and my brain shuts down completely and resets, am I really me anymore.

>>15413470
Except boltzmann brains are impossible because of the big rip. Dark energy will literally kill existence less than 100 billion years from now

>>15413552
>I can also concede that continuity of consciousness is tenuous even within our own mind.
now you're getting it

>>15413554
you're a hilariously stupid moron
there was no big bang, and there will certainly not be any big rip
the universe is provably static, infinite, and eternal, and its contents are continuously generated

>>15413561
Your fear of death is palpable

>>15413565
fearing that which doesn't exist is utterly moronic
it's all the people desperately scrounging to keep a particular body alive who clearly have such an irrational fear for something which provably doesn't actually exist ("death")

>>15413566
It's okay, your fear and denial won't matter when dark energy destroys the universe

>>15413571
I'm pointing out that there's no such thing as death, so there's nothing to be afraid of
you on the other hand are desperately trying to prolong the lifespan of the body, like patching up old and worn-out clothes
so who is really afraid here, hmm?
it's pretty obvious to anyone with a working brain
>when dark energy destroys the universe
no such thing exists, so that's like waiting for a unicorn to come charging and stomp the universe underhoof

>>15413510
>Any review papers you would recommend on this topic?
I have attatched a pdf which is a review article. If you want to get further detail, read the experiments done on drosophila, most of the pathway has been discovered there. The current best researcher in the topic is probably julius brennecke, though there may be more in america, i'm only really familiar with the people here in europe, as they are who i often meet at conferences.
Over all, to get aquainted with the research of the ageing process, i suggest reading lopez-otin et al 'haulmarks of ageing' 2013, and gorbunova et al 'the role of transposable elements in ageing and age associated disease' 2021. Go from there.
>Also does any group have plans to test some kind of lipid delivery of these strands in other species? Who can I fund in this area?
I don't think that would work, these are not regular RNAs, they are modified in such a way that the PIWI proteins must recognise it, otherwise it won't work. For this it has to be 17-21nt long, start with Uracil-Adenin on the 3' end, 5' end must be decapped in some way in which we don'T know if any further alteration is done, etc... These experiments are partially on the way, i too have designed an experiment for recognition of 5' modifications, once i'm done with my current experiments, i'll get on that.
>>15413520
This is outside of what we consider biological immortality. That is all i know about, so it is all i'm willing to comment on further.
>>15413528
>Are you indicating that by preventing cells losing their effectiveness, our own cells will automatically repair age related health issues?
Yes, and no. Once DNA damage is done, it is very hard to undo. Hard enough for it to be inpractical. The thing is, our body has a method for clearing damaged cells, this is called sensecence clearing. If the system works well, old cells are cleared and replaced.

>>15413577
>This is outside of what we consider biological immortality. That is all i know about, so it is all i'm willing to comment on further.
biological immortality is utterly moronic, because there will always be wear and tear to a system
the only way to achieve biological immortality is to revert to an embryonic state, at which point you're back at >>15413463 again, which you will indeed be forever and forever

>>15413300
Yes, I think it isn't only theoretically possible, but natural. I think that people built some civilization much earlier, but began getting sicker and sicker for an unindentifiable reason, so they began removing civilization piece by piece (sort of like modern microplastics) but everything turned out to not help, so they devised a total cleanup and return to nature and not only it didn't help either, but instead people began to outright die. None of them thought of not what they made, but the minerals that they used up and were missing from the environment.

>>15413450
>you can't be obsessed with trannies, it's like being obsessed with door-to-door salesmen.
anyone that constantly mentions trannys is obsessed with trannys. You might not like it but it's the truth

>>15413577
I see. So it seems for age reversal and other age related health issues something like specialised folded proteins would be necessary. However there may be a shortcut to increase longevity in the shorter term. Encouraging and disheartening combined.

>>15413512
>your intellectual superior is now
Oof

>>15413528
I could go into a litlle more detail, because it is actually really interesting, but it does get technical, so feel free to ignore this wall of text.
So transposons are mostly dormant, but the evolutionarily most recent around 100 of the LINE-1 family (this is in humans) are so new, that the traditional zinc-finger proteins which silence transposons permanently have not evolved to silence them yet. So the body deals with them in tearms of epigenetics, H3K27 and H3K9 histon trymethylation. This however is reversable, it happens naturally, slowly with time, and is spead up by another epigenetic mark i'm not allowed to name untill the we publish (final round of revision is over, it's in preprint). This speeds up removal of methyl pattern, and activates the transposons. They then cause DNA damage at an exponential rate. Affected cells become sensecent, cytoplasmic DNA builds up which along with the misfolded proteins on MHCI activate the immune system. This clears the sensescent cell, but it also is an increase in activity for NF-kB (a part of immune signaling). As you age this kind of event is more and more frequant, cells go senesncent faster than the clearance, which slows down, NF-kB levels reach a threshold at whic it interfears with production of GH (a hormone that is to do with bone, skin and cartilage maintenance) causing further problems. Tissues around senescent tissue become senescent to help prevent cancers, but this way a lot of your functional tissues also become useless, and inflamed. This is called sterile inflamation.
Things like cancer, dementia and alzheimers are a game of chance, in which transposon induiced mutation happenes in key genes, like tau in alzheimers or p53 or mTORkinase in cancer.

huurrrrrr i'm gonna live forever
thats why i don't need to worry about having children

appealing fantasy to retards with personality disorders who can't stomach the idea of caring for anyone other than themselves. future genetic dead ends, good riddance to their low iq genes

>>15413598
eh, not really protein folding question. Fusion proteins are more the thing in the field.

>>15413603
>i'm gonna live for ever in space with muh robot anime waifu
cringey faggot, to dumb to figure out the difference between tv shows and irl

>>15413499
>Jesus fucking christ these people. No, they are not working on it, they are sharlatans
lol, i knew some retard would say that. It's pretty clear you know nothing about them. I'm sure they managed to get so much funding and get so many people working for them because they're totally fake. Makes a lot of sense
>They are just the cunts who go infront of the media, they don't actually do much.
Do you not realise their work involves community outreach ? Aubrey has said numerous times his work is mostly community outreach. Both he and David hire scientists to do most of the research while they do the outreach work. It's totally normal and it's the way a majority of businesses operate

>>15413323
>>15413499
I think that most species are immortal - the proteins and pathways are there, they are only inactive due to the lack of essential elements because of >>15413592 .

>>15413603
Appreciated. I get the picture though much of the details elude me. It gives me some study material because I'm here a lot and so is >>15413611 and co so posting good info is nice for the lurkers.

>>15413605
>muh friggin children
Fuck off back to >>>/x/

>>15413499
>David did some decent work on apoptosis, but what he does now is take other peoples results and does basic rescue studies with them to get headlines, but adds virtually no value to the research
>Julius Brennecke
David has 6 times as many citations as this guy since 2018. Is that because of the lack of value ?

>>15413655
Please go back to wherever you came from.

>>15413611
I said nothing of the sort. Learn to read faggot.
>>15413613
>>15413655
Headline chaseing is not good science, it is just attention whoring. Every field has a few. Sincleair and Degray are no more good ageing researchers than nieldegrass tyson is a good astrophysiscist. They are posci.
>>15413634
thanks

>>15413592
>>15413629
so, what are we missing?

>>15413655
Citations on Google Scholar include non-academic articles. i.e. Jew press overstating Jew researchers to advance their careers.

No relation to scientific value whatsoever.

back

>>15413300
Immortality is impossible due to entropy.
That set aside, a significant lifespan relative to the age of the universe is not mathematically feasible, either. The statement it is possible is equivalent to the statement that during these billions of years of life time, you will never suffer an accident, will never be fatally attacked, and you will always have resources/energy to sustain yourself.
These three demands *are* feasible to realize, but only if the numbers of external actors acting on you approaches zero. Most people would not deem living a billion years but without a society surrounding them, or any kind of social stimulus, satisfactory. This goes for all kinds of variables, btw. (the less, the better), but the question of actors makes this an especially non-deterministic prospect.

Now let us regard the last case: biological immortality on lifespans significant vice-versa an organism. Let's posit 10k years.
This is, possible but again, everything above still applies, though the likelihood of anything deadly happening is distinctly smaller. However, in discussing biological immortality I implicitly take up a different aspect: whereas in the above billion years scenario we likely regard your substratum as (almost wholly) non-natural-evolution based (i.e. for example a substratum in silico or a perfected carbonic bionic platform), with this latter scenario we imply we are still talking about an essentially similar homo sapiens, or Earth vertebrate, substratum. These have the issue of having brains that can develop dementia -- if not due to anything else, then due to random chance. The same applies for accidents that may damage your brain, thus essentially undesirably extremely altering if not outright removing you as a consciousness.
Thus, your long lifespan would be rendered unusable, even though the body sans brain perfectly aligns with the demand "longevity + health + youth".

>>15413300
>Do you think immortality is theoretically possible?
Depends on your definition. Biological life extension is certainly possible, life spans of thousand years are within biological reality as we progress ever further into retroviral reprogramming and modifications. Physical immortality such as a fully cybernetic entity should also be possible. By gradually replacing your brain cells with nanomachines you could extand your lifespan into million of years, as only catastrophic damage could kill you. If a million years are not sufficient then the trillion trillion years offered by digital immortality might be for your liking, similiar as the secondary method you also gradually replace your brain cells but instead with artifical brain cells you replace them all with virtual brain cells until the majority of the substrate of your mind occurs digitally. There you can expand the physical substrate across a vast area greater than earth and outlive the stars. I hope that true immortality, in form of reversible computing, spacetime-substrate is possible as oblivion is to terrible.
Who is the judge to say what someone deserves or not?

>>15413300
there are extant immortal animals like sea turtles and crocodiles. they technically can live forever but in practice they die from cancer. there is no way to defeat entropy, it's a universal constant

>>15413339
excellent post
>>15413342
nobody is falling for you trick, leftist

>>15413603

>but the evolutionarily most recent around 100 of the LINE-1 family (this is in humans) are so new, that the traditional zinc-finger proteins which silence transposons permanently have not evolved to silence them yet

... and never will, as some of them do play important physiological functions. The more destructive ones (although in some like syncytin there is a clear overlap between functionality and harm) kinda ride along like freeloaders as full silencing is not an option ... and selective one is usually "not worth the effort", meaning there is simply no selective pressure to get rid of them as you easily get through reproductive age before they show any deleterous effects.

>>15413300
/lit/fags are fags, more news at 10
>muh memento mori, death is le poetic
if you want to die so bad go jump off a building

>>15413300

THE SPACE YOU INHABIT IS IMMORTAL, WHY COULD YOU NOT BE TOO?

>>15413300
>Do you think immortality is theoretically possible?
It has already been thoroughly proven to exist. Unironically study NDEs and realize that there actually is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die. And while the Bible and the Qu'ran convinces few people who do not already believe, the book in pic related is known to convince even hardened skeptics that there is an afterlife.

Here is a very persuasive argument for why NDEs are real:

https://youtu.be/U00ibBGZp7o

It emphasizes that NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and when people go deep into the NDE, they all become convinced. As this article points out:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mysteries-consciousness/202204/does-afterlife-obviously-exist

>"Among those with the deepest experiences 100 percent came away agreeing with the statement, "An afterlife definitely exists"."

Since NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and they are all convinced, then 100% of the population become convinced that there is an afterlife when they have a sufficiently deep NDE themselves. When you dream and wake up, you instantly realize that life is more real than your dreams. When you have an NDE you immediately realize that life is the deep dream and the NDE world is the undeniably real world by comparison.

Or as one person quoted in pic related summarized their NDE:

>"As my soul left my body, I found myself floating in a swirling ocean of multi-colored light. At the end, I could see and feel an even brighter light pulling me toward it, and as it shined on me, I felt indescribable happiness. I remembered everything about eternity - knowing, that we had always existed, and that all of us are family. Then old friends and loved ones surrounded me, and I knew without a doubt I was home, and that I was so loved."

Needless to say, even ultraskeptical neuroscientists are convinced by really deep NDEs.

>>15413576
it isn't their time to understand yet

>>15413300
I plan to live forever, of course. Barring thatvI think I would settle up for some trillion years. Even 500 years would be pretty nice.

>>15416506
What kind of optimist do you have to be to regard digital immortality as desirable?
What if your entire being is called with a shoddy argument that causes all your surrounds to sleep(100 000 years)?
What if some asshat with higher privileges than you decides to torture you for the next million subjective years?

I am not critiquing your post (I am the fellow effortposter directly in front of you), by the way, just commenting the idea.

>>15419468
>What kind of optimist do you have to be to regard digital immortality as desirable?
Cosmic and posthuman transhumanist. The transferral upload method would fundamentally change who and what you are. It is the reverse form of classic mind uploading, instead of only preserving the external self, you preserve the internal self only, while the external self must necessarily grow greater to be able to survive the destruction of the physical vestige of the mind. Such mind will be utterly posthuman and fully self-aware to endure such procedure. The external self dies but the internal one survives.
>What if your entire being is called with a shoddy argument that causes all your surrounds to sleep(100 000 years)?
What?
>What if some asshat with higher privileges than you decides to torture you for the next million subjective years?
Access to your substrate must remain to your own, yet of course some people, organizations and powers seek to control others and this is a danger in all cases of existence, no matter what. You could today be kidnapped, tortured, raped, mutilated and kept alive for decades, but this possibility does not hinder you to live on. I do agree that cybernetic and digital immortality will be quite costly and the corporations that will develop it in this millenia will make it cost. We of course don't know what foem research and application will take in the next centuries but I don't think that all possibilities will remain within only the reaches of such powers. In time and effort access can be made universal, especially taking biological life extension into account.

Thanks for the point

>>15419592
>What?
In all programming languages, there is a sleep(time) function. If you call it, e.g. sleep(1000), the code will pause execution for 1000 milliseconds.
What if someone or something accidentally calls a routine like that on the code that is responsible for modelling your digital environment? Notably, this doesn't affect your actual self at all (if it did, this would be a non-issue). It still fully satisfied your demand that the subject itself be opaque and non-accessible to the external world.
The physical analogue is someone that literally cannot die being trapped in a lead cube and buried in the earth.
>in all cases of existence, no matter what. You could today be kidnapped, tortured, raped, mutilated and kept alive for decades, but this possibility does not hinder you to live on.
This is not a strong counterargument. In these cases, you *can* and *will* die at the most extreme permutation of whatever actions are inflicted upon you. Notably, the death will happen with parameters that are still "natural" to the human biological and mental condition. For example, if you starve to death because you haven't eaten in 3 months, then all of this still transpired under regular human biological, mental, and behavioural parameters.
However, if one were to be trapped for 1 million years in said lead box, that is not a scenario that has *any* precedence for a human/animal experience. We can regard such fates as suffering significantly, transcendentally worse than those of bad fates (starving for 3 months, being tortured for 10 years, live long imprisonment) that may be still regarded as within the parameters of usual human suffering.
It is difficult to explain what I mean, so I just count on you to correctly ponder what I am trying to say.

It is also important to note that death is the cessation of suffering. The danger with digital immortality that this way out (death) may not be within "reaching distance" to the digital you.

>>15418082
A good response. I would also add, that transposons, even the more destructive ones, are very usefull in evolution. They can cause gene duplication, inserting an intron free purely exonic gene into an untranslated, heterochromatic region, which this way is redundant and harmless, a good starting point for a new function to evolve.
And the disposable soma theory of evolution shows, that your ability to evolve is more important than your personal longevity.
So over all, without intervention our war against transposons will never be won, and even with our help it won't be easy, but it can be done. We just need to untangle the mess of interactions between transposons and everything else, along with their exact role in ageing. And i'm working on that, along with some collegues and a few other good labs.

>>15416731
Those are not immortal animals, cancer is a symptom of ageing. The consensus is, that immortal animals do exist, but only some acoels, planarians, and hydra are biologically immortal.
>you can't escape entropy
This is a silly argument. Sure, entropy increases in the universe over all, but that has no bearing on us locally. That is to say plants are less entropic than soil amd CO2, but because of sunlight, soil salts and CO2 turn into plants.
Similarly, we maintain our state of being less entropic than our surroundings, by use of chemical energy. This use of energy to maintain a less entropic state can be done for longer time than arbitrary 120 years which is aboit the current maximum human lifespan.
The human being as a system is currently optimized for that leangth, because there isn't significant evolutionary preassure to live further. But we could.
Optimize DNA maintenance by increased activity of repair mechanisms, decreased activity of mutagenic elements like transposons or transposase enzymes, reduice copying errors by increasing cellular logevity (via things like proteon isoform optimisation amd forced G0 state), titrate out ROS, enhance mitochondrial function by targeted cDNA maintenance, boost protein clearance, in stemcells boost telomerase activity and induice PIWI piRNA activity, on a tissue level boost senescent cell clearance, administer senolitics, modulate NF-kB, regulate GH...
There is so muvh we could do to optimize. Just one of these (forced G0 by IGF knockdown) increases lifespan in model organisms like c. elegans by 8 fold.

An anarchist who hates everyone, and hates life itself. How original. Couldn't even write /lit/ properly because they're an anarchist who doesn't care about the rules. Coming from /lgbt/ I wanted to ask, how can I become more gay? I think we can help each other, OP.

>>15419613
>In these cases, you *can* and *will* die at the most extreme permutation of whatever actions are inflicted upon you.
Infinity is only experienced at the end of it.
Additionally we shouldn`t expect digital minds to have any resemblance of human mind, atleast not in the long run. I do agree that the ability to shape the mind and body offers ever greater threats to it, yet more chances. True immortality is only fit for those who are willing to hold existence on every circumstances, and some minds may be needed to be modified to become so. If no method is found to reverse entropy, then the last remains of life will be such posthuman feeding of black holes and killiing each other for the last remains of heat and energy. A chilling and yet fitting return to origins.

>>15420223
Believe me, (still the anon from >>15415625) still believe that we will eventually defeat the ultimate enemy. Whenever I see someone, some animal, aging. Becoming frail, their presence in the world dissolving, dying. Every time I think it, hope it, and believe it.
One day. One eon. We will find a way. Life will find a way to transcend entropy.

>>15413300
I wouldn't want to live forever in a world without my grandparents or dog. I'd rather die and join them wherever they are

>>15421068
If death is oblivion, then you will never meet them again.

OP here, thanks for the interesting answers everyone. I guess I wouldn't consider myself an "optimist" as others call it. I'm sure the average lifespan(sans circumstantial lethality) will become longer in the future with advances in the medical field. However, there are many things which people in the past thought would be possible in the future. And I think some things will just remain beyond our understanding. This really started because I don't like immortality as a scifi trope.

>>15420378
It's not that you have to defeat entropy (i.e. the universe itself). The universe had to come into appearance and so did life, you can't really explain it as anything but almost miraculous. And if it happened once what's to say it doesn't happen again? If time is eternal, then whose to say that you won't exist again? And again, in another universe or the same one, in endless cycles until all possibilities are exhausted and the metacycle begins again. Either way, you won't live to see it.

>>15413499
>This is not science, it is phylosophy or religion
Science is just an offspring of philosophy held in higher regard by mistaken people out of perceived utility, which also has philosophical underpinnings. In the end, the only thing we have with which to understand the world is our minds and everything we perceive is filtered through it.

>>15421553
>In the end, the only thing we have with which to understand the world is our minds

Your genetic lineage had bodies before they had brains. You "percieved" the world through touch, temp, electrical, magnetic, gravity, including other planets. Jupiter and the sun orbit a point between them, not inside either one, that equally effects Earth.

>>15413300
Our children and our memories in pictures and videos : immortality

>>15421572
Forgot pic*

>>15421574
Children die. Pictures and videos vanish. I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. I don't want to live on in the hearts of my countrymen; I want to live on in my apartment

>>15421692
>I want to live on in my apartment
With every passing year, no matter how big the prison, one bedroom or the entire planet, eventually everything will feel the same; a limit. The people, the science and understanding of the world, what "culture" is from a Biology, Genetics, Evolution perspective.

Your way is the way of recursive demonmancy(?), basically breeding demonic echos of Psyche closer to the surface. Also becomes dumber, not just evil, but the two will become indistinguishable on meta-level.

Nature has a workaround fpr those worthy of Immortality. You have to bring something to the table of nature, you cant just sit down and say "gibs me dat". You enter heaven with miracle in hand, but you will never be aware this exchange took place, to ensure true intentions.

The Gate is closed to the one's of impure intentions.

>>15413300
If jellyfishes and random deep sea creatures that are more akin to blobs succeeded at these tasks with different methods, surely there may be a way to engineer It someday, but that's wishful thinking more than anything else, considering we are ressource heavy creatures this wouldn't be sustainable at all unless we trim out a lot of what makes us humans
>>15413318
This, wished we had more means to study sea-life and their biology