Is this mad monk and SENS hacks like Musk, or does he an actual

>>8379299
He is certainly knowledgeable, but human negligible senescence is, and will be, a crap-shoot of differing theoretical treatments.

>>8379299
he has a good plan, and nobody has been able to disprove it in the last 10+ years

what he lacks is the proper funding to implement it.

>>8379378
Why is no billionaire latching on to him ?
This moggles my mind.
I mean, if i was a billionaire myself i'd focus on cyborgisation because flesh is weak, but it's not like aside from that russian billionaire it's being done either.

What the fuck is wrong with rich fucks, don't they want immortality ?
Is it a case of "i need to keep my money to buy immortality when it's there let some other fag pay for its development" ? This one at least makes some sense.

I fear it's the much more retarded "immortality is impossible gotta blow it on hoes and hookers" or even "need more 000000 never enough", though.

>>8379378
>he has a good plan
What's his plan?

>>8379413

Praise the Omnissiah

>>8379299
I think aging will be solved within 50 years, but Aubrey will probably have zero involvement in the process.

>>8379418
The fag repeats himself on every fucking of his talk, so just watch any one of them you google.

>>8379413
Billionaires don't care. He has support from like two millionaires though.

>>8379432
That's like having the support of your wife or your friend, i.e. it doesn't helps whatsoever unless you literally have nothing else going on.

>>8379413
they very likely are spending money on that kind of research in secrecy
After all only Aubrey and a few others are honest about their purpose

>>8379441
Are they really ?
I understand why you want to think that, but are they ?

>>8379448
If you consider how much contempt they would probably get for it, I'd do it in secret too.

>>8379448
I think so yes, under some pretexts like curing all diseases or "reprogramming" cells so they don't get cancerous

>>8379413
to put it simply, most rich people have no idea that he and SENS exist.

it's particularly crazy because to have a proof of concept of SENS therapies on humans you would just need 50, maybe 100 millions but not more than that.

facebook spent 19 billions to buy whatsapp.

>>8379448
they are not. there are very few people in the field and none of them is working in some secretive lab.

>>8379832
What I meant is that of those people very few are honest about what goals they are trying to achieve, most of them will not openly say that they are working on "immortality" (whether by halting or reversing the aging process or with some cyborg bullshit thing)

Ultimately I'm saying they are probably funding it indirectly under the pretense of fighting all diseases for instance (Like suckerberg did, if he's genuine about it)

>>8379299
>anti-aging guru
>looks 25years older than he is

ya, immortality...here we come

>>8379951
wow, really makes me think

>>8379299
No, he's completely unlike Musk. Musk has been able to get results. He doesn't do any wetlab work. And by doesn't do any, I mean none at all. Not even having grad students do it.

Aubrey de Gray is a bigger meme than Musk

>>8379425
What makes you think ageing will be solved in 50 years?

>>8379413
eh, peter thiel is his main funder I think

>>8379507
You could test it for peanuts, relatively speaking, off the books.

>>8380465
He's not, but he donated like 600 000 - 1 million

Their main funder is De Grey himself: he was rich, he inherited 13-14 millions, and donated 11 of them to SENS (another big reason to believe he's not there to scam people..)

>>8380396

Human-level AI will probably emerge before 2040. Can't imagine it'd be a very large gap between strong AI and indefinite human lifespans.

File: 1470454365106.jpg (4KB, 164x250px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 164x250px

THERE IS NO HOPE, THERE IS ONLY ME. ALL THE SAME MISTER DE GRAY SEEMS LIKE A NICE FELLOW. I HOPE HE WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED WHEN WE MEET. I HAVE ATTACHED A PICTURE OF AN AMUSING CAT.

>>8381461
>Human-level AI will probably emerge before 2040.

No, it wont. That is merely popsci bullshit.

>>8380396
His arguement isnt that in 50 years that immortality will be attained but rather that eventually anti-aging will outpace the aging itself essentially providing immortality (just not immediately)

>>8379299
SENS have actually produced results. A group they funded at Yale were published in Science magazine recently, a proof of concept they achieved was taken on by a start up (a treatment to prevent atherosclerosis by taking a bacterium gene, that breaks down cholesterol, and adding it to the artery wall in cell culture), they also have a panel of highly esteemed scientists (including Antony Atala, one of the World's leading tissue engineering experts) behind them. As for De Grey, it seems highly likely that he's earnest as he donated a shitload of money to his foundation, and no one can say that he isn't knowledgeable about biology.

>>8381469

>No, it wont. That is merely popsci bullshit.

It's no longer fringe belief, just to clarify. Renowned AI experts like Demis Hassabis, Shane Legg, Juergen Schmidhuber, Bart Selman, Yoshua Bengio, Geoff Hinton, Rich Sutton, Dileep George, Blaise Aguera y Arcas, and many more wholeheartedly disagree with you. If you don't recognize any of those names you probably aren't very well informed on machine learning in the first place.

Some of those people expect it even earlier, actually. DeepMind's co-founders (probably the most advanced AI research group on the planet) anticipate it by 2020-2025.

Eliezer Yudkowsky describes our current situation best:

>'This matches something I've previously named in private conversation as a warning sign - sharply above-trend performance at Go from a neural algorithm. What this indicates is not that deep learning in particular is going to be the Game Over algorithm. Rather, the background variables are looking more like "Human neural intelligence is not that complicated and current algorithms are touching on keystone, foundational aspects of it." What's alarming is not this particular breakthrough, but what it implies about the general background settings of the computational universe.'

Since 2000, many neuroscientists and AI researchers have formally defined intelligence. Several of those definitions may be accurate, and practical implementation could be a matter of scaled hardware rather than software. Strong AI by 2040 is no longer a fanciful prospect.

>>8381483
Yes they all agree that the computing power will become equal to humans, but the ability of that computing power and how effuiceintly it interprets information is a whole different ballpark. No, there will not be AI which can be comparable to humans by 2040. It is popsci bullshit. They take scientists opinions and misinterpret the meaning to inflate a concept.

Consciousness, a full human AI is centuries away mate. No one has defined consciousness yet. If you want something that can play chess, sure, but not a recreation of the human mind.

>>8381487

Actually, I have precise sources detailing expert opinions on human-level AI's emergence. I'll repost:

Shane Legg, co-founder of DeepMind (research group that beat Go):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCpFTtJgENs

Interview quote from Demis Hassabis, CEO of DeepMind:

>“If we look at the rate of progress and what we’ve seen in computers with AlphaGo coming on the scene and project that forward, I think it would be hard to say it will be very long until computers in general becomes stronger than humans. Not just AlphaGo, but looking at the success in deep learning and other areas. Machine learning and artificial intelligence research progress is very rapid at the moment. It seems to be only a matter of time now until we’ll see a program that’s stronger than humans.”

Paraphrased quotes from Demis Hassabis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1ytzW3Icig&feature=youtu.be&t=2152

Bart Selman (renowned computer science/AI professor):

>"There is general consensus within the AI research community that progress in the field is accelerating: it is believed that human-level AI will be reached within the next one or two decades. A key question is whether these advances will accelerate further after general human level AI is achieved, and, if so, how rapidly the next level of AI systems (super-human?) will be achieved."

Interview with Geoff Hinton:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/21/google-a-step-closer-to-developing-machines-with-human-like-intelligence

AI expert survey regarding human-level AI's expected arrival (median answer was 2040):
http://www.nickbostrom.com/papers/survey.pdf

Talk snippet from Blaise Aguera y Arcas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ5Bum-H7rk&feature=youtu.be&t=1350

Presentation from Dileep George, neuroscientist and co-founder of Vicarious (expects human-level AI by 2035):
http://futureoflife.org/data/PDF/dileep_george.pdf

cont'd below

>>8381492

cont'd

Summary of AI's current capabilities and the gap to human-level, from machine learning researcher Vladimir Shakirov (predicts human-level AI by 2021):
http://sciencevsdeath.com/review-of-state-of-the-arts.pdf

Talk by Juergen Schmidhuber, esteemed AI researcher and original developer of LSTMs (predicts human-level AI by 2040):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya9YfYveFXA

Another bit by Demis Hassabis, anticipating rat-level AI by the end of 2016 (human-level AI would line up with his 2020-2025 prediction in this case):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAMuNUixKJ8

It is no longer fringe belief to anticipate strong AI within 50 years, period. You can argue against it but you cannot treat it as pure pop-sci fantasy. These people are leaders in machine learning, not Kurzweil-esque cult leaders.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542371/a-tale-of-do-it-yourself-gene-therapy/
We'll see in 10 years

File: Elizabeth Parrish.jpg (249KB, 2544x1439px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 2544x1439px

>>8381585

BASED LIZ

>>8381585
That's interesting.

>>8381349
Damn. So he's pretty serious about it. Hope he makes his dream comes true.

Not to be that guy who likes death (Because fuck that shit), or thinks the world is overcrowded or some other shit.

Like what are the true benefits for humanity if Grey's stuff works and the lifespan is extended to an indefinite amount?

>>8384992
is it so hard to think about this?

all the knowledge one accumulates in life doesn't suddenly die with the body it's in. people have indefinite amounts of time to accomplish tasks. people can master many different subjects and make greater horizontal contributions to fields.

>>8384992
The most brilliant minds will be able to continue being brilliant minds for centuries.

>>8384992
people will have to think long term.

no more "screw the planet cause I'll be dead in 100 years who cares".

>>8379378
Nobody can disprove I have magical elves up my ass either. It is not an accomplishment.

>>8385845
Only 7 processes seem to be responsible for damage accumulation and nobody has been able to disprove this.

plan = detailed analysis on the interventions needed to clear the damage

aubrey's damage approach is already producing results most notably in senescent cell clearance, he was talking about that a decade ago and now it's proven to increase lifespan in rodents. SENS funding is not very good, but the man has almost singlehandedly made rejuvenative medicine into a respected field.

>>8385777
Those are some nice trips.

>>8384992
Basically: >>8385032, >>8385726, >>8385777

Extra century tacked on to a person's life could change the world and most of what we think hugely. A society with slowed ageing or without it would be a beneficial one due to knowledge gained, people putting more investment into the future, people learning to do more things or do something they never done before.

>>8385852
And those are? I'd enjoy a good article to read.

File: 1471757901615.jpg (25KB, 274x237px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 274x237px

>mfw I get another 100 years to shitpost on /sci/

>>8386526
http://www.sens.org/research/introduction-to-sens-research

>>8379299
When the fuck does he expect some kind of trials on his stuff, or results for people?

>>8387875

when you give money

>>8387875
Soon I hope

>>8387875
He puts his best estimates at 2036-2041.

I hope he's right.

>>8388966
>tfw born just in time to get your life extended

>>8390724
Well that's only if it works. Even with life extension you gotta carry out your life in a way it won't get you killed other means: avoiding accidents, getting robbed/murdered, and etc.

Also those were just his estimates which he says is a 50/50.

>>8390729
Well that's a given, but hope is the last thing to die, and if I can hope that I can live and the people that I love can live longer, I will hope for it.

I honestly would be more concerned about diseases that are more likely to pop up the longer you live honestly, though as genetic engineering becomes better we have more chances overall.

>>8381492
>>8381498

Experts being overconfident isn't exactly new in the field of AI.

If we could get a gene from other species that are biological immortal, which one should we get?

>>8390827
jelly

>>8390827
Jellyfish.

I remember correctly there is one species that technically goes back to a younger state when it approaches its end.

>3rd Worlders get to live for centuries and continue to breed by the tens.

>>8388966
He gives that estimate with the stipulation that funding is slowing down progress by a factor of three.

>>8390827
no point in getting one from hydra or other jellyfish, they are too different to help us, and they don't become immortal by actually staying slowing down aging, they just cheat and revert back to a pubescent state.

We should look at species that are negligibly senescent, that's what we are looking to achieve for ourselves. Like turtles and some crocs.

File: image.jpg (52KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x375px

>aging is cured
>want to get a job
>need at least 100 years of experience

>>8391008

this, exactly this

>>8390851

>trying to apply concepts from modular organisms to unitary organisms

i would say most of you in this thread are comparing apples and oranges, except that isn't even a reasonablly large measure of disparity

>>8386641
>>8391010
underrated.

>>8391010
Doesn't sound that bad unless you born post-ageing cured. Even then you had to be born a good 2-3 centuries post-ageing cured for this to happen.

Even then with ageing cured the birth rate would drop for countries with them, and you would find employment via connections with people who got anti-ageing.

tl:dr You don't have to worry about it, and neither does your greatx4 grandchildren.

>>8390992
>implying age is the first factor of death in the third world
>implying they'll get enough money for it
>implying it won't be declared absolutely haram

>>8379832
Theres ALWAYS someone in some secret lab

>>8391044
Anon you have a huge point.

>>8391044
>>8391044
I wonder how it will get regulated.
>if you want to be immortal you can't have kids
Is there anyone that would take the kids?

>>8391444
You probably can have kids, just 1-2 every XX years. You probably won't be able to retire (and get social security) unless you built up an immense wealth for yourself or plan on dying via ageing.

>>8391044
This. Overpopulation is a meme.
And as soon as these 3rd world countries improve their birth rate will decline below replacement rate.

Curing aging might be the best way for countries like Japan and Korea to halt their depopulation.

>>8379299
Dudes beard game is strong

>>8391538
Just imagine being 1000 years old and having hundreds of descendants, last living ancestor of your family tree. Kinda feels like being some old sage
Meeting your great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren and telling them stories from over 1000 years ago.

>>8385845
No, he has made scientific claims, meaning they are testable.

>>8391566
And there won't be any need to import people so they could make babies in our stead to pay for baby boomers pensions.

In France retirement cost us almost 300 G€ per year, add to that treatments cost on age related diseases (alzheimer, cancers, etc...)... If we ever manage to cure aging we would have a fuckhuge boom in our economy

>>8390801
Look at the results in the last five years, mate. Writing's on the wall. This time it's happening.

>>8379435
Well if your friend is good-looking and the wife agrees to a threesome it's not so bad is it /sci/

>>8391575
>Imagine telling them stories from over a 1000 yrs ago.
Tell them how you plowed the shit out of their x-great grandmother until she got pregnant with their x-great grandfather/mother and how you are still tapping that ass (most likely).

>>8391575
Would it be wrong if I fucked my x-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchild?

Nothing hes doing will combat a bullet to the face.

>>8390729

after aging is cured i'm betting existential threats will start to become a high priority. the reason we don't care much about asteroids hitting the planet is because we don't think we'll be around for it.

>>8392657
Of course existential threats will become a priority along with diseases people will encounter from a long life.

>>8392089
No, There is enough genetic difference.
iirc on average there are about 8th generations between parents.

>>8391574
He's Rasputin.

>>8391044
Underrated post when people discuss anti-ageing, and somebody spews overpopulation.

Has, SENS done any testing yet?

>>8395147
Does anybody know?

>>8395147
It published some papers yes.

But if you mean actual testing of an anti-aging drug, then no. Still to early for that.

>>8395800
Any guess when they can begin some kind of testing on rats or whatever?

>>8395853
they are not even near that yet

De Grey said in an AMA at rebbit that there is a 50% we would see radical life extension in mice in the next 6/8 years but of course, that's pure speculation from his part.

They certainly would do better if they were not in dire need of money

>>8396116
Sad to hear. He probably won't see any of those funds until he proves his methods work on the mice, and then he'll have attention and funding brought to him.

>>8379418
Crashing this plane.

>>8379951
That's the point, that's his big meme obviously

>>8381467
Ah, hi Death
haven't seen you in a while.

>>8379418
Here you go >>8396441

>>8390827
lobster. or my vote: naked mole rat, Heterocephalus glaber

>>8397388
Don't lobsters get their long lives from molting and having their DNA restored?