Are you going to get cryonically preserved? Why or why not?

No, I can't see a way of cells being destroyed via crystal formation ever being reversed. I also can't see the point of getting a few more years once my cells have degraded through ageing, it's not like they will be able to give me my 20yo body back.

I see Cryonics as nothing more than offering hope of life after death to the non-religious.

File: 13freeze.583.jpg (53KB, 583x303px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 583x303px

>>6564509
What if you're wrong though? You could be losing out on eternity. Suppose immortality and restoring cryonically frozen bodies is possible within the next thousand years.

Ray Kurzweil, the futurist most of you have probably heard of, is an Alcor member.

These are the tanks you would be stored in. They need to be filled with liquid nitrogen once in a while, but they don't use electricity.

>>6564524
If you think it has potential then drop the $30k, I'll spend it on having fun in this life.

>>6564524
perhaps immortality is not an appealing concept

especially if I have to spend it with people like you

>thirty grand
>not that expensive

but im just a teacher, you see

If I were immortal I'd become a bad person. Much better to spend that $30k on a pointless bangup bash in the last month of my life.

File: 1397273082594.gif (2MB, 250x343px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x343px

Only I shall become immortal, after I master electromagnetism!

As a backup though, I'm sure as fuck going to shell out acouple dozen grand, that's really very little.

>>6564585

fatlifts, pls go

File: 1349348292619.jpg (166KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 640x427px

>>6564592
No you.

>implying I wasn't discussing science topics under the trip PDP_Fag on /g/ for years before /sci/ was even made

>>6564486
I consider the chance of revival from getting myself frozen at the Cryonics Institute to be so infinitesimally low that the risk/benefit just doesn't work out. There's better ways to spend my $30K.

>>6564524
It's a risk/benefit thing. The benefit, times the probability, gives you how much you're willing to pay.

The benefit of immortality? Enormous - but not infinite. And I consider the possibility of revival from cryonics in the present state in a beneficial condition to be so very, very low that it's not even worth $30K.

It's like gambling. Sure, the benefits of winning are enormous - millions of dollars! - but the likelihood of winning is so low that a lottery ticket isn't worth five bucks.

has anybody ever been cryo frozen before they were already dead?

>>6564601
>>6564604
>30k being worth more than a ~5% shot at the big time
Peasants.

>>6564544
>perhaps immortality is not an appealing concept
You could always just kill yourself after you're revived.

You would probably be loved by billions for being one of the few daring time travelers of the early 21st century.

I mean, imagine if we could bring Thomas Jefferson, or even just some average Joe living in ancient Mesopotamia, back today. They'd be famous around the world.

>>6564609
>>6564609
>5%

That's insanely optimistic, by my reckoning. I'd be surprised if the chances were better than one in ten million.

And I just don't feel like my life is worth thirty billion dollars. I think I can do more good in the the world, more efficiently, with 30K.

>>6564616
Hey, if you've got the money. Why not? Wouldn't it be cool to die only to wake up a thousand years in the future? Worst case scenario is you won't be able to experience disappointment if you're never revived.

>>6564620
>Hey, if you've got the money. Why not? Wouldn't it be cool to wake up a multimillionaire? Worst case scenario is you're out a few bucks.

And yet, I don't consider lottery tickets a wise use of my money.

>>6564627
Yeah, but lottery tickets (in the best case) just give you a few million to play around with in your remaining life.

This would be giving you more remaining life. Potentially unlimited remaining life. If you're an atheist (or agnostic) who does not believe in the afterlife, shouldn't that be your goal, no matter how small the odds, and no matter how great the cost?

The alternative is simply nothing. You'll cease to exist and be forgotten about in due time. There won't be a "you" to appreciate anything beneficial about that outcome.

>>6564616
>I'd be surprised if the chances were better than one in ten million
And yet the potential lifetimes it could garner is significantly more than ten million, swinging the cost:benefit back in the other direction.

I GUESS NOW YOU LOOK PRETTY STUPID

>>6564486
So uh, what happens if the company goes bankrupt in the next hundred years? Does everyone just get fucked?

I guess you're not really gonna notice are you.

Anyways immortality is gonna be real shit for everyone that's not part of the top class, especially if an immortal top class keeps growing. Though I guess the cost for continued treatment could stop the class from getting too large, but you get the point.

>>6564634
>So uh, what happens if the company goes bankrupt in the next hundred years? Does everyone just get fucked?
It's designed to be financially self-sufficient. If a nuke went off near their storage facility, yes, they'd be fucked. We'd all be fucked.

The people who run these organizations are all being cryonically stored themselves. They're "believers." They're in it to win it, so to speak.

>>6564638
To clarify, I meant who's obligated in the future to res everyone who's frozen, assuming people discover a technique to do so?

Like even if they have a contract with a 'res company' or whatever it would be called, doesn't it still depend on the company / selected party to actually do so x years in the future?

Doesn't seem like a very stable idea.

Furthermore, the cell aging has to be fixed for them when they're unfrozen:

If it doesn't require continous treatment, there will be a select class with this treatment already applied, who may pressure the company at that time etc as to not add any more 'long living' people to the system.

If it requires continued treatment:

How are they going to pay in the future? It must be insanely expensive. If they can pay, won't a large influx of extremely wealthy people coming back into the economy affect the prices (almost inf demand).

>>6564650
>To clarify, I meant who's obligated in the future to res everyone who's frozen
Stupid, didn't you watch that episode of The Next Generation?

>>6564653
I'm assuming that's a tv show
>Having a tv
So no I didn't, care to explain?

File: KrioRus_logo.jpg (44KB, 665x188px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 665x188px

>>6564650
>To clarify, I meant who's obligated in the future to res everyone who's frozen, assuming people discover a technique to do so?
Honestly, I'm not sure. I'd imagine it's somewhere in the legal agreements, that the organization which initiates the process itself, is responsible for initiating the process for reviving you.

>How are they going to pay in the future? It must be insanely expensive
I don't know. It's cheap now. That $30k is an American company. There is a Russian company, KrioRus, which stores your brain suspended in liquid nitrogen for $12k.

The tanks just need a regular supply of liquid nitrogen, which is presumably fairly cheap. The staff who fills the tanks doesn't need any more training than a burger flopper.

File: 1296158485919.jpg (28KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x375px

>>6564656
You disgust me.

I don't like the idea of leaving my body vulnerable and dependent to some company for decades or even centuries. You could wake up with the company janitor's dick in your mouth or strapped in front of a face hugger egg.

In the wild animals going into hibernation or undergo metamorphosis use camouflage or find a hidden place. If you're going to get frozen, the cryonic chamber should be fully automated and placed in a remote location(in orbit/deep underground bunker).

>>6564667
>You could wake up with the company janitor's dick in your mouth
I'd suck a janitor's dick if it meant being revived from the dead m8.

>>6564661
Sorry, I was ambiguous. When I was referring to the cost, I meant the anti - aging treatment upon resurrection, or whatever terms you'd like to use.

That's why I split my argument into two trees based on this magic anti aging stuff being used once or over a lengthy amount of time.

>Legal agreements

I just don't see a legal agreement surviving events such as bankruptcy etc.

>>6564667
But then who's going to unfreeze you if you're hidden and no-one knows about this?

>>6564669
>who's going to unfreeze you
The Star Fleet's flagship, the Enterprise, you fucking pleb.

>>6564632
>potential lifetimes it could garner is significantly more than ten million
Wut
Are you saying this thing can really make us last longer than a couple more years?
Because even messing with the eutectic point of an alloy can fuck it up major time.
I'd be seriously thinking twice if they're going to mess around with MY body, something more complex than a piece of alloy by an astronomical degree.

>>6564671
I don't think you could be frozen for a billion years, no. I was referring to biological immortality.

Yeah though, they do 'mess around' with your body posthumously, they replace your blood/perfuse your body with fluids that make the vitrification process less damaging in terms of ice crystal formation, and a well done vitrifying process minimizes damage even more.

Besides the presumably toxic cryonic fluids they perfuse your body with, and the ice crystal damage (which is frankly exaggerated here, look into their actual processes before insinuating how 'devastating' the freezing process is, please), I'm obviously relatively optimistic, and plan to put the money down for it hopefully before I turn 40.

File: 1400409054347.gif (981KB, 197x239px) Image search: [Google]

981KB, 197x239px

I wouldn't want it done now. I'll wait and see and hopefully by the time I have to consider it we've reached the technological singularity and therefore I have digital immortality, or then they can just improve the cryonic preservation technique.
But just saying "fuck it, I wanna go see the future" and turning into a Popsicle now for no other reason? Fuck that.
But if I have the means when on my deathbed and it's still my only shot, then yeah, why the fuck not.

File: 1335287665311.gif (1MB, 300x188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x188px

>>6564698
>digital immortality
>trusting a mind/consciousness transfer that isn't verifiably you and not some new doppelganger consciousness with your memories
>dying a bleak, nearly pointless death, the only point also being the single most depressing thing: nobody will actually know your consciousness blinked out of existence at the moment of transfer

>>6564698
Besides which, yeah, cryonics right now is only done posthumously, if you had a better option you wouldn't have fucking died, might as well plop down the money as soon as you can and not hope you get some relatively slow progressing terminal disease and have enough liquid assets to contract out the cryopreservation.

>>6564486
>CI currently has over 100 humans preserved in liquid nitrogen in Michigan.
You mean, over 100 dead human bodies.
I actually don't care what people want others to do with their dead bodies, cremated, buried, frozen, fuck, eat, whatever.

>>6564668
What a bitch.

>>6564605
No.

I intend to have myself frozen on death.

The only argument against it seems to be poverty, but I don't plan on being poor.

>>6564844
>but I don't plan on being poor.
No one does

>>6564486
Dude when you die they will let your body rot for up to 24h until they finally freeze you.
The bodies will never be able to be revived.

>>6564846

Then there's no problem, is there.

>>6564630
>This would be giving you more remaining life. Potentially unlimited remaining life. If you're an atheist (or agnostic) who does not believe in the afterlife, shouldn't that be your goal, no matter how small the odds, and no matter how great the cost?

Not really, no. I don't assign my life an infinite negative value.

File: c44b3036-a7b6-4b59-857c-feba8e4b5.gif (1MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x200px

>>6564668
>>6564663

le epic tripfag face

>>6564486
It will almost surely possible in the future to repair the physical damage. What we don't really know is if our memories will be completed destroyed, and so our identity. We need to solve the hard problem of consciousness to say if cryonics is going to work or not.

I will probably do it though. If i'll have enough money, Alcor, for sure. If not, I'll go for CI.

>>6564703
This is the shit I've been saying, and even worse, YOU wouldn't know your consciousness blinked out of existence.

>>6564703
Who said it'd be like that?

Yeah, Im going to GIVE them 30 grand to kill me. Fucking imbecile.

>>6566287
What are you suggesting exactly that would avoid that?

>>6566311
some sort of artificial interface. Brain in a vat type of thing.

>>6566313
Still subject to degradation/aging.

>>6566314
Perhaps, but maybe we'll find ways to remedy that. I don't know man.

>>6566290
It's more that you're dying and you give them 30 grand to preserve you.

>>6566320
>maybe we'll find ways to remedy that
That would pretty much be the same thing as solving biological aging. I wouldn't turn down having a supercomputer with a vast knowledge base being linked to my brain, but linking it with other brains in a network as some kind of faux method of solving the mortal problem? Nah, it's not really a long term solution as far as I'm concerned.

File: 1401527509484.gif (907KB, 500x394px) Image search: [Google]

907KB, 500x394px

>>6566324
Well I mean if we have the technological solutions to artificially animating a brain in a vat with a full interface with a computer for full virtual reality experience, all we have to do is create biological immortality in those particular cells in a very controlled and sterile environment. It's conceivable.

But maybe that's just my fear that your described earlier being manifested as optimism.

>>6566324
Just fuck off, you'll die like the rest of us. Deal with that.

>>6566330
I'm working at it from my own angle, I'll master electromagnetic fields and thus the manipulation of all matter, become motherfucking Dr. Manhattan, bitch slap all of you, rule the planet for acouple hundred years as god emperor and actually make you fucks do something useful as a whole before I set out into the cosmos.

>>6564486
No.

>But why?

Cost, for one. Suppose they do manage to reverse cryogenic cell damage AND whatever killed me, AND any brain damage that may have occurred between the time I died and the time I was frozen at some time in the future, all of these tasks rating from "fairly unlikely" to "highly improbable".

Who's going to pay to repair and revive me?

Practicality, for another.

I'd have to die under very specific circumstances to be a "viable" corpse-cube. It's also rather unlikely that in the time required for science to advance far enough for reanimation that my cryogenic facility will not have suffered a "defrosting" event.

That's my thinking, anyway.

>>6564703
If even a sliver of my former glory is transferred into a new form, then the world shall tremble in fear.

Also even if things go perfectly on the ressing part what are you going to have in terms of money or training?

>>6566366
Money or training as you perceive them won't have any meaning, say, 200 years from now. Hell, there are some studies that predict that 40% to 50% of current jobs will be automated in the next 20 YEARS.

>>6566390
Alcor claims that they will revive, rehabilitate and reintegrate "patients" into society using compound interest generated by their "Patient Care Trust".

I'm skeptical of that claim, even if their intentions are pure I expect such disruptive bleeding edge, niche technologies to remain extremely expensive basically forever if they're even possible.

tl;dr, I suspect they've greatly underestimated the cost of what they promised, even if it's somehow possible.

What if you wake up in a future where you were just brought back to life to be painfully experimented upon pr enslaved for whatever reason.

>>6566442
"untraceable zombie slave labor" is the way I heard it described once.

We honduran now! Well, in the future.

>>6566442
Well, I'd run the risk, considering that the alternative is

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xk2kf5_cremation-of-human-body_tech

ITT OP shows possibility of immortality for 30k

In response /pol/ proves that a great majority of its users are tard level cretins who would give up a shot at immortality even if they had a spare 30k

Confirmed: Average /pol/ user is unimaginative dumb fuck who cant comprehend how little 30k is.

>>6564486
Future humans will make it a point NOT to unfreeze those fags, reasoning that only a pompous dickweed would be self-absorbed enough to actually do this.

>>6566476
>>implying humanity will not have killed itself off by then.

You naive idiot.

Sounds like a scheme to cajole money out of desperate people. The only possibilities I see happening from likely to very unlikely are:

End up in a dumpster
Becoming parts for a low level pawn in a sci-fi RPG
...
...
...
Reanimated and enjoying the benefits of an advanced future

>>6566481

>desperate people

I don't get it. Why have one to be "desperate" to do this? Dying is fine, one will eventually find peace in non-existence. However, seeing the future would be even better. I'd sign up for cryonics yet I'm relaxed about my mortality, just as many of the cryopreserved people actually were.

Also
>cajole money

People who manage cryonics facilities are themselves "patients". They're not trying to cheat anyone.

>>6564486

No. The technology is still crude and I think those corpses have as much chance of being brought back to life as Egyptian mummies.

>>6566498

You sound desperate.

>>6566534
whatever makes you sleep at night, mate...

>>6564703
I agree that these mind transfers shouldn't be done before we understand how exactly consciousness works, otherwise we might end up with a race of robots who act like humans, but are not conscious (although I don't think that's likely to happen). It would also be strange if the copy of your consciousness was created before you died. On the other hand, there might be a way to gradually replace your biological brain with an artificial one, so we could avoid all this bullshit. Honestly, I don't really care, cause I definitely don't want to exist for an eternity, or even for a million years.

>>6566465
I bet you waste money on casinos and lotteries.

File: 1401569498455.jpg (130KB, 960x849px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 960x849px

On my deathbed, if I have have some spare 30k and my family doesn't need those money, sure, why not, I'm not gonna need em anyway in nothingness.

>>6566567
That's a pretty dumb analogy, cause in gambling, you give money for a chance to receive more money, but your profit is likely less than what you gave them therefore it is stupid to gamble. With cryonics you give money for a chance of eternity/extended life/seeing the future, so you are basically buying a PRODUCT from e-bay that might never be shipped.
Oh, and I'm not a butthurt cryofag, your analogy is just objectively wrong.

P.S.: Even gambling might be worth it in extreme cases, like if you could buy a lottery with a chance of 1 in <big number> of winning for one cent, no matter how big the big number is, because the unhappiness caused by the loss of money doesn't just approach zero as the amount of money gets smaller, but actually reaches it, because humans don't work in a perfectly mathematical way, so you could buy a non-zero chance of more happiness at the cost of no unhappiness. Buying lottery in real life is still retarded though.

>>6566583
>With cryonics you give money for a chance of eternity/extended life/seeing the future, so you are basically buying a PRODUCT from e-bay that might never be shipped.
Getting a small chance is like buying a product from e-bay? Okay...
>Oh, and I'm not a butthurt cryofag, your analogy is just objectively wrong.
You sound just like one.
>P.S.: Even gambling might be worth it in extreme cases, like if you could buy a lottery with a chance of 1 in <big number> of winning for one cent, no matter how big the big number is, because the unhappiness caused by the loss of money doesn't just approach zero as the amount of money gets smaller, but actually reaches it, because humans don't work in a perfectly mathematical way, so you could buy a non-zero chance of more happiness at the cost of no unhappiness. Buying lottery in real life is still retarded though.
30k is a significant sum. And you are trying to justify your "not-gambling".

>>6566593
>Getting a small chance is like buying a product from e-bay? Okay...
The emphasis was not on ebay, but that example was still retarded. What I tried to say was it is not like gambling, because you have a chance of getting a product that you can't get anywhere else. It's not about money, it's about happiness. I added ebay to show that the idea of buying something with a less than 100% chance of getting it is not that far fetched, though it didn't emphasize the fact that currently there is no other way of having a chance of immortality.

>You sound just like one.
Well I'm not one.

>30k is a significant sum. And you are trying to justify your "not-gambling".
It had nothing to do with cryonics, it was just my thought about the difference between being worth it in a mathematical sense and in a human sense.

>ITT : people assume the future can be known in advance and everything will go well for a freshly unfrozen person who in most cases won't know anyone else in the future, might be hated for being from another space and time, won't have any wealth to speak of, won't speak the languages that exist a thousand years from now, might not be able to adapt to their new life (diseases, political systems etc)

Most of you here can't be much older than 25 or so, I'm absolutely interested in what's going to happen in the future and the idea of cryogenics is certainly interesting but you need to stop acting like everything is going to work out just because that company said so after you gave them 30 thousand dollars.

>>6566571
Oh i'm sure they won't need the money at all. I mean who is ever in a position where they could use an extra 30k, especially when an average burrial costs between 6 and 10k ?

What makes you think that people will want to spend time and money on reviving and rehabilitating (important, since everything is probably different) someone from fifty or a hundred years ago? You'll likely have no skills that are useful at that time, your knowledge will be outdated, and you won't have any money to actually pay for the unfreezing process (and odds are that your grandchildren won't be too keen on paying for it).

>>6566771
Yeah the resources could simply be unavailable, actually it's very likely that they may be. That and the population in a hundred years, not that billions of people are going get frozen but it's still one more person some state has to take care of to an extent.

>>6564486
You might as well put your body in a large jar of vinegar because it's really no different.

>>6564486
>implying people in the future will spend the time and money developing the technology to "bring back" a bunch of entitled boomer assholes from the past.

>>6564613
>You would probably be loved by billions for being one of the few daring time travelers of the early 21st century.
>I mean, imagine if we could bring Thomas Jefferson, or even just some average Joe living in ancient Mesopotamia, back today. They'd be famous around the world.
Nope. They'll call you a "time nigger" because you'll be loud and helpless.

>>6564653
>Stupid, didn't you watch that episode of The Next Generation?
you mean, the one where they just dumped the bodies into deep space because no one knew what to do or gave a shit?

inspiring.

No one has mentioned that the $30k is usually covered by a life insurance policy? How can you have debated the cost for so long with no one mentioning that it's probably going to be far less than that out of pocket?

>>6566498
>They're not trying to cheat anyone.
all it takes is some trust fund brat in 50 years to inherit the facility, liquidate the assets and dispose of the bodies in a mass grave.

You'd have to be pretty fucking famous to have people even visit your grave in 50 years. Most people are forgotten by that time.

Consider modern graveyards: You lease the plot and in 50 or so years, they dig you up and throw you away, and sell the plot again. So much for "rest in peace".

>>6566832
I was under the impression that that was more of a European practice.

Also, I still visit my great-grandparents' graves, and they died before I was born.

>>6564613
Yes, if we could bring back someone actually important, that would be great. Most people are just not interesting, though.

Sure, the first two or three average joes getting resurrected would get some attention. The next hundred or so will be an annoyance.

>>6566853
>I was under the impression that that was more of a European practice.
>Also, I still visit my great-grandparents' graves, and they died before I was born.
It's definitely an American practice. Your grandparents might have a 100 year lease. Eventually their descendants will stop visiting because they won't even know their names or that they even existed.

>>6566814
They will, for themselves. And y'all cryofags are gonna be their guinea pigs.

>>6566764
If you're not being buried, they don't need that $6-10k.

So that's $20k they'd end up seeing in the end, and that's assuming we can't find a way to make it cheaper by the time he dies.

>>6564613
>You would probably be loved by billions for being one of the few daring time travelers of the early 21st century.
Youd be a novelty. Also say humanity first goes through another dark ages and then ascends again and finds you. You might not be able to commit suicide then, the whole situation is completely out of your control.
It might be worthwhile for them to revive you even if it meant 2years of intense pain in a coma for you, after which theyll ask you a load of questions in the last few months of your life

>>6564630
>This would be giving you more remaining life. Potentially unlimited remaining life. If you're an atheist (or agnostic) who does not believe in the afterlife, shouldn't that be your goal, no matter how small the odds, and no matter how great the cost?

what? no
Your goal is to produce offspring that is better than you.

>>6567152
>another dark ages
Well, we'd need to go through a first dark ages to be able to go through a second one.

Seriously, how can you be this misunderstood about history?

Perhaps that's why frozen people would be valuable. It would help diminish myths like this.

>>6566314
At the point where you can transfer consciousness that wouldnt matter at all. You can just change the brain every few years. Also whatever is transferring your consciousness can obviously hold it.

Biological immortality is the exact same thing, just that only a few tiny parts of your copy are created and switched for those parts of you every second.
Most of your cells arent the same anymore, they were 10 years ago.
I propose your conciousness died almost every night and was replaced

>>6567155
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Dark_Age
This idea is pretty interesting, though.

Plus once bitrot sets in, our era will be even more obscure than the middle ages to people of the future.

A popsicle man would be our only hope of recovering all those years of lost history.

>>6567155
What is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)

>>6566390
>What do you think you will have paid for? Liquid nitrogen?
Where do you expect liquid nitrogen prices to go?
You think you can trust people with your money after youre dead? What are the specific clauses that tell them to invest how much into research and keep how much of the money growing, so they can actually pay for your unfreezing?

>>6567166
Did you even read that?

No respectable historian uses the word dark ages anymore.
It was a myth propagated by pop culture and the lack of archaeological tech in the 1800s.
Only people who know nothing about history use the word.

People used to use it to mean "obscured," but we know enough about the era now that not even that definition works.

>>6566422
this.
Immortality would be extremely costly to society. Why would they ever give a license to some underevolved nobody from the past?

>>6567174
Then tell us about the great advancements in mud and gristle building that happened during that era, also

>bubonic plague

>>6566498
>sign up for cryonics yet I'm relaxed about my mortality
The difference between you and the average Christian then, that they bought off a little of their deperation with all their intellectual credibility while you did it with just a little bit and 30.000$

>People who manage cryonics facilities are themselves "patients"
So are gurus

>>6567179
Read the fucking wikipedia article you linked.

It says absolutely nothing about any legitimate recession in technology. In fact, many important discoveries happened in that era.
We would be lost today without this period of time.

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_in_the_Middle_Ages#Science_in_the_Middle_Ages


Stop being an ethnocentric idiot who takes pop culture as fact.

I know you saw it on Family Guy that medieval times were stupid, but that's not how it really went down.

>>6566583
>P.S.: Even gambling might be worth it in extreme cases, like if you could buy a lottery with a chance of 1 in <big number> of winning for one cent, no matter how big the big number is, because the unhappiness caused by the loss of money doesn't just approach zero as the amount of money gets smaller, but actually reaches it, because humans don't work in a perfectly mathematical way, so you could buy a non-zero chance of more happiness at the cost of no unhappiness. Buying lottery in real life is still retarded though.
pretty nice thought. Would be kinda educating, because people would buy Bulk, or if you prohibited that pay with their time ultimately.

Just as you are by the way. Even if you have 30k over without having to think about it, you will still have wasted all the time of careful consideration on a relatively stupid subject.
Also I find the idea morally bad, and Im sure If I was inclined to kill rich people, the ones who look different and speak differnent and are from the 21century and immortal would be first choice.

Tell me one place on earth, where if you were frozen in 500BC you would not already have been unfrozen, forgotten or killed otherwise.

>>6567200
Be that as it may, it had neither teh pomp of Roman times (which the collapse of very well would have put people back a bit) nor the innovation of the Renaissance so by comparison it was pretty "dim" if not "dark" exactly.

It has nothing to do with family guy and everything to do with the textbooks we had in elementary-middle-high school .

In any case, something like a Nanodisaster could very well put us in some sort of recessive dark ages

>>6567214
It's only "dim" because you're applying a qualitative analysis of its culture based on your own ethnocentric Western view.

People in the renaissance had this massive boner for ancient Rome, so they were quick to shoot down anything that wasn't Roman.

They considered any other culture degenerate, and so they ignored any advancements people actually made.


Modern people understood that it was a major era for science and technology even in the early 1900s.

The term "dark" never meant technologically or culturally inferior, but rather obscured from vision because we had so little surviving literature.

Today we have enough knowledge about them that not even this term applies.

It's not dark, or dim.

File: startled.gif (3MB, 297x300px)

3MB, 297x300px

>mfw when you can list a cryogenics company as your life insurance beneficiary

>>6566764
>being buried
>not just having your body taken by your family and burned in the backyard in a DIY funeral pyre
I shig diggy

>>6564616

In the 70's they couldn't imagine having 64 Gigabites of information in a size of your thumbnail, and many of them would have bet we would never do it, as you can't imagine (for example) nanorobots or programmed bacterias that heal the dead tissue and prepare it to be revived.

File: Untitled.png (191KB, 352x435px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 352x435px

>>6566557

I don't understand people who don't want to live at least 300 years more.

Knowing that all my knowledge I've been accumulating will be vanished in about 40 to 50 years is something that brings up my worst feels.

Because if you think about it, living a life you won't be able to remember sounds like pretty worthless, like you just spent all the day making some delicious cookies and the next day you won't remember you ate them.

I'm about to cry, comfort me /sci/.

>>6567331
this.

Even a small amount of time say 60 years for example wouldn't be so bad if you had full capability, but no your mind and body have already started to deteriorate.

and considering each new human has to have all the knowledge and software reinstalled for probably the first 20yrs of their lives
we basically only have 20-30 years of life in which we are totally capable of living to our potential.

It's very depressing. I don't think freezing our bodies is going to work either. Isn't this just the same issue of making an exact duplicate of yourself not really being "you"?
Freezing yourself means you shut everything off, all the machinery. To turn the machine back on again I'm not so sure there is any guarantee that it's going to result in "you" becoming aware again. Someone else will be in your body (although friends and family will of course have no idea and there would be no way to prove it)

File: TV into Space.jpg (143KB, 650x1080px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 650x1080px

>>6567361

Now I feel even worse, I'm going to drink a glass of milk and go to bed while I think how worthless my life is.

>>6567226
scientific progress Im told is exponential, even if it wasnt especially slowed then it mustve been very slow just because it was long ago.

Also they couldnt do Math or read. Or far fewwer than romans. Thats why they were living in the dark ages and made so little progress

>>6567361
yeah just like you cant be sure about being you after you slept, fell into a coma, or got an electroshock

>>6567403
But it wasn't magically slower than the age before it. The exponential curve continued as always. You might as well call ancient Rome a dark age by the same logic.

And it was never really exponential, but that's a crude enough approximation of the reality to say so.

>Also they couldnt do Math or read. Or far fewwer than romans. Thats why they were living in the dark ages and made so little progress
That's completely untrue. Stop propagating the myth.
They didn't make little progress, they made just as much as ever.

You're basing this on the archetypal peasant you see in pop culture, not the average medieval scientist.

You see Game of Thrones and you think that's a realistic portrayal just because they play lutes and live in castles.

And as I've said before, the word "dark" was never meant to mean "backwards." It means we lost a lot of their literature to the sands of time.

>>6567547
Im pretty sure they were a less alphabetized society than the greeks or romans.
The dark ages is not a term for some magical even that hindered progress, but for stupid uneducated peasants in the area where people later would write history books about the dark ages.

So yeah they were certainly less bright than the romans, but you cant really compare the two its just that people later wanted to be put in one line with the romans just like they wanted with the greeks

>>6567409
What he's saying I think is that they may have to replace enough of your neurons that your consciousness wouldn't fully reappear.

Nobody's ever been dead long enough to know what it's like.

Those that have died long enough suffered irreversible brain damage, so we have no way of knowing if their consciousness fully reconstitutes.

I've died and been resuscitated before, but if I were dead for any longer I'm not so sure it would still be me here.

>>6567561
Oh and for context I should add, that these peasants before had some benefit from roman technology or rather roman trade. The analogy being that if order breaks down where you have your cryo body youll be fucked just as if you were reliant on washing yourself in a hotbath in cologne.

And I know the USA is more like rome in a conventional use of that analogy, but our rome could be oil, or freedom of religion

>>6567561
If we're talking about the education of the general public, that's a different thing than the periods' greatest minds.

Sure, peasants may have been less educated on the whole, but that didn't stop medieval scientists from expanding above and beyond even ancient Rome's scientists.

It's a problem of recognition.

Isaac Newton gets all the credit for discovering inertia, but Jean Buridan came up with it first.

Even Aristotle had no fucking clue that inertia existed. He made up some bullshit about extrinsic forces.

>>6566826
I don't think you can have it paid out like that.

>>6567563
>Those that have died long enough suffered irreversible brain damage
So you want to make those that suffered brain damage a different category?
Because then everybody who came back from the dead clearly recovered conciousness and it shouldnt be a consideration for you.
Otherwise youre just reiterating that we cant revive somebody who is dead.

Also
>What he's saying I think is that they may have to replace enough of your neurons that your consciousness wouldn't fully reappear.
Youre jumping to a scenario where they would replace neurons straight away?
Why then shouldnt they be able to replace them so perfectly, that your conciousness reappears anyways?

>>6567361
>Someone else will be in your body (although friends and family will of course have no idea and there would be no way to prove it

Do a personality test before and one after.
A person that has the same personality as you with the same memories and that your family and friends recognize as you is a pretty specific definition.
Id say only "you" fit that definition
otherwise you should consider your consciousness after waking up a new one.

>>6567585
What I'm saying is how do we know vegetables get their consciousness back?

And how do we know that fully replicating someone's neurons will bring their consciousness back?

It's not something profound, but it's a question we can't really answer.

>>6567588
People are in a constant state of flux, but their sense of perception always remains constant.

What the body their consciousness belongs to perceives, they perceive, even if that body and mind change.

So it's still "you" when you wake up, because "you" still perceive what your mind perceives.

That might not be true if you get unfrozen.

>>6567590
>What I'm saying is how do we know vegetables get their consciousness back?
Oh so you were in fact just reiterating.

Also: Vegetables dont have conciousnesses. You might still consider it the same situation as waking up if you were to revive one.
If you woke up one morning and have remembered what you were learnning the last evening youre kind of another person.

You might wake up one morning and find that you cant use your legs and can then ask yourself the question if you still feel like yourself.
Or you could wake up and not be able to read/math/think anymore. None of this seems philosophically troubling to me

>>6567594
why are you reformulating my points in this Hipsterlike style?

>>6567594
>That might not be true if you get unfrozen.

>>6567584
You think incorrectly. Life insurance is how most people pay for vitrification.

>>6567580
>If we're talking about the education of the general public, that's a different thing than the periods' greatest minds.
I feel that says the most though. Also Im pretty sure you can expect more great minds from a more literal society.

>Sure, peasants may have been less educated on the whole, but that didn't stop medieval scientists from expanding above and beyond even ancient Rome's scientists.
Which is really easy though, since they came after the romans and the romans ceased to exist.
Also
>beyond even ancient Rome's
>even

>Isaac Newton gets all the credit for discovering inertia, but Jean Buridan came up with it first.
More like for formulating the mathematics ( And as a german I realize of course that it was really all Leibniz, because we invented everything and you can consider countries around us us as well)

>Even Aristotle had no fucking clue that inertia existed. He made up some bullshit about extrinsic forces.
Wouldve been really hard though, since he was way before its discovery.

Youre making this all about science, when its really about social stability and infrastructure. If the USA break down (who are currently control whereever the cryotanks are Id guess) OP has a problem. And with timescales being so long theres a high chance of dark ages cominng.

>>6567606
Theyd sue you for faking your death to them once you were rvived though right? And that makes this money theirs 3000years ago. Including interest.

>>6567594
> goes to sleep
> suddenly you wake up and that's not you

>>6567620
Everyone in this thread (and in life) is basically saying technology declined or slowed down after Rome, which I'm pointing out isn't really true.

Newton DOES get all the credit for 99% of people. You've never heard of the guy I mentioned unless you're big on the history of the middle ages, which very few people are.

Anyway, I was just using that to illustrate how advancement did happen above the Romans at a steady rate. They built off the Romans, who built off their predecessors... etc.
It never just stopped with the fall of Rome.


And if you look elsewhere like the Middle East, culture and social stability were at an all time high.
Really this is just another artifact of the Eurocentrism everybody in the West has about history.
"I'm going to ignore that some mudslime invented chemistry as we know it today because I don't like sandniggers" is basically what happens.

My only point is that there was never a first "dark age" in the sense that you're thinking.

Whatever would happen in the "second" dark age would be something totally new to history.

>>6567625
Legal death and being able to be revived are not the same thing. Even if you are revived you still died as far as the law is concerned.

>>6567647
I've died and been resuscitated, but I'm still legally alive.

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_premature_obituaries

Death laws aren't perfect, so of course they'd change if something like this actually became practical.

>>6567647
No way thats gonna go through. And if the law consideres you dead, you should not have access to your finances.
>Ive moved from convincing people that it makes no sense to assume the real person would change, to convincing them the legal person would...

Also if I get a cryotank that works reliably after two days, how many insurances companies do you think Ill be able to bankrupt before I have fucked it up for all of you?

>>6567656
You never legally died. The current definition of death isn't satisfied by cessation of breathing and heartbeat. The fact would remain the the life insurance was payed out in accordance with the law at the time.

>>6567661
I think you've mistaken me for someone else. I am not the person who was tryingto convince everyone that cconsciousness does not survive these procedures. I don't even believe in consciousness.

>>6567668
I was just meaning that to show how the legal proclamation of death is flawed.

Obviously it wasn't designed to accommodate things like resuscitation, short term or long term.

It would need to be reworked.

>>6567668
yep you legally died.
Pretty sure you cant do that shit to a living person.
>The current definition of death isn't satisfied by cessation of breathing and heartbeat
No way you have brain activity in there
>he fact would remain the the life insurance was payed out in accordance with the law at the time.
The really important thing to you will be the law of the future and its prohibition of unfreezing cryogenated bodies.

>>6567678
I didnt think you were the same person. Thats why I wrote "people", not "one guy"

>>6567690
You are either trolling or need to take a break. Look at the post I was responding to and things will make more sense.

>all these people trying to act "wise" and pretending like they don't want to live forever

I understand all the nuances of why cryogenics won't work, but in general a lot of you seem to be all "I DONT WANT TO BE IMMORTAL IMAGINE HOW MUCH THAT WOULD SUCK" blah blah. Shut the fuck up, what sucks about it? A guess that you might get bored of life?

>>6567732
Don't rub it in. These people would jump at a chance at immortality just like we would, it's just that talking about it is stigmatized in some cultures. There's no reason to mock them for it.

>>6567742
This website exists so that people can talk about this sort of thing without feeling stigmatized.

You're anonymous. There's no fear of judgment if you speak your mind.

>>6567732
Well at this point, no I don't.

I'm not looking forward to the decay of my body and/or mind, and for instance I think human augmentation would be great, because the human body, while not perfect, is pretty great, so long as it works the way it was intended to and stays healthy. But I also understand that augmentation would almost necessarily be controlled by corporations that would sell them, they wouldn't be perfect right away, and there would probably be some kind of privacy violation associated with the product, if every other advanced technological item I own is any indication.

As far as living longer, I know the idea is that you're resurrected when science can improve humans significantly, but right now all of this is far from granting immortality as you all claim. Seems it only extends your life, and some of us are just pointing out that that's a life you have no idea if you're even going to want to live it when the time comes.

And I don't think you're supposed to feel ready to die before you're pretty old or you've seen some shit, so at our ages of course you're afraid of dying, you haven't done enough. Turn 70, see if you still feel the same way about all this.

>>6567805
My perfect image of immortality implies not turning 70 in the first place.

there are only a few things more valuable then money, time is one of them.

so yes I would definetly do it.

>>656780
your perfect image of immortality involves living less than 70 years? congrats on being immortal bro.

>>6564848
This. Afaik when the electric synapses in your brain turn off, there's no comin. Back. Even if they save your body you won't be "you", you'll probably be a tetarded vegetable.

I want my consciousness uploaded to disk and put into a handsome humanoid robot with a 9" dick

>>6566465
>/pol/
Dude this is /sci/

>>6566812
But then my bones will get all floppy ;_;

>>6564486

What makes you think a potentially immortal future civilization is going to want to bring you back to life?

If people become 'immortal' im sure we'll have population issues

>>6567995
If we had the technology and resources to prevent everyone from dying, we would certainly have the technology and resources to care for them.

>>6567995
Nigga they gon conquer mars n pluto n terraform that shit nigga gucci as fuuuck homes

then they gon bring u back n u b like "nigga dafuq just happened?!?!"

n den there wont be no dumbass population problems bitchass nigga

keeping everyone immortal isn't going to be cheap no matter how it happens.

It's not gonna be the sort of thing you can inject once and then be done. And even if it is, they can just make it so expensive that most people can't get it.

This really won't be as big a problem as people say.

File: regenerative01.jpg (68KB, 818x614px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 818x614px

Since we've proven we can 3d print organs, how many years till we can do a 3d scan of Walt Disney's cryogenic frozen head (or any frozen body) and do a 3d print with all his neurons with memories completely intact?

>>6567164
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Dark_Age
> famous real example is with NASA, whose early space records have suffered from a Dark Age issue more than once. For over a decade, magnetic tapes from the 1976 Viking Mars landing were unprocessed. When later analyzed, the data was unreadable as it was in an unknown format and the original programmers had either died or left NASA. The images were eventually extracted following many months of puzzling through the data and examining how the recording machines functioned.[5]

Looks like bad management and planning to me.

>>6568152
what a shitty ear
I bet you can't hear anything with it

>>6568169
You don't hear with the pinna, it just helps you pick up certain frequencies a little better.

So that ear probably works better than yours does.

>>6569867
but all the sound would just go through the holes

>>6569991
I think it's a scaffolding. Cells will grow in between the holes and over the scaffolding, then the scaffolding dissolves, and more cell replace the space left by the dissolved scaffolding.

>>6569999
Would it turn me into audiophile?

>>6564486
CI currently has over 100 humans preserved in liquid nitrogen in Michigan. Alcor has about the same amount.

If they went in as recreational and if they can be revived, I will go get 100 fedoras and eat them all.

>>6570182
Alcor has over 900 people signed up. You won't eat them all.