taw comments on Normal Cryonics - Less Wrong

58 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 January 2010 07:08PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (930)
Tags: cryonics contrarianism

Comments (930)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: taw 21 January 2010 11:27:25AM -1 points [-]

And what are their premiums? They simply have to be far higher than form 25 year old's 20 year term life insurance if their business is to make any profits. The only low premiums I've seen so far are for young people's term life insurance, which people keep naively extrapolating ignoring aging.

I'm really disappointed that this supposedly rational community keeps failing basic math. The entire "cryonics is cheap" argument relies on failing basic math.

Comment author: AngryParsley 21 January 2010 06:04:32PM *  3 points [-]

Again, I replied in the very same thread I linked to.

Remember that a lot of people who get life insurance policies cancel them before they die, or fall on hard times and can't pay the premiums. I'm 24 and healthy. I went the more expensive route and got whole life insurance, so my premiums are $64/month. With Alcor dues I end up spending about a grand per year on cryonics. Did I mention I picked what is basically the most expensive option? (Alcor whole body preservation with whole life insurance). You could easily cut that down to $300/year if you went with CI and term life insurance.

$64 * 12 * 50 = $38,400, which is a bit less than the policy of $200k. If that money were invested every month, it would end up being significantly more than the policy amount.

Term life insurance is not a bad idea for most people. Lots of people save up money over their careers. $80,000 is barely a down payment on a condo in the bay area.

Comment author: Technologos 21 January 2010 07:31:55PM 1 point [-]

I should note that most of the organizations we are talking about (Alcor, ACS, CI) are non-profits.

Comment author: wedrifid 21 January 2010 12:00:33PM 1 point [-]

I'm really disappointed that this supposedly rational community keeps failing basic math. The entire "cryonics is cheap" argument relies on failing basic math.

$80,000 plus $500 a year in membership dues is cheap. (Alcor). I can multiply, divide and find various integrals and derivatives of those figures if it makes you happy. Perhaps it is my English skills that are my flaw? You dispute my understanding of 'cheap'?

Comment author: taw 21 January 2010 02:39:34PM *  2 points [-]

80k is for neuro-preservation, full body is 150k. Neither of them counts as "cheap" by any definition of "cheap". It's also at least an order of magnitude more expensive than what Eliezer keeps talking about ($300/year).

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 January 2010 06:39:28PM 3 points [-]

CI is $50K for whole-body.

Comment author: CronoDAS 21 January 2010 06:58:47PM 0 points [-]

I thought their current website said $30K, if you don't contract for standby services?

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 January 2010 07:17:00PM 1 point [-]

That's not including the cost of transportation to CI.

Comment author: CronoDAS 21 January 2010 07:21:19PM 0 points [-]

Oh.

Comment author: taw 21 January 2010 09:48:59PM 0 points [-]

This reference says it's much more if you include all costs:

The Cryonics Institute charges $28,000 for perfusion and storage of an Lifetime Member and $35,000 for a Yearly Member. [...] For service more comparable to what Alcor provides — including Standby and Transport — a Lifetime Member pays $88,000 and a Yearly Member pays $95,000. For details on CI pricing see Membership and Details Concerning SA Standby and Transport for CI Members.

Comment author: queensblade 21 January 2010 09:55:14PM -1 points [-]

28,000 means enough vitrification solution for neuro

Comment author: RobinZ 21 January 2010 04:40:14PM 0 points [-]

The $300/year is supposed to be the insurance rate for a $100k policy, but I agree - that is not cheap. I am likely to make enough money to afford it if I stay on my current career plan (mechanical engineering), but it's not a negligible sum.

Comment author: wedrifid 21 January 2010 11:09:11PM *  0 points [-]

Neither of them counts as "cheap" by any definition of "cheap".

Dollars per expected day of life extension. Applying the same definition to other health investments makes cryonics the 'cheap' option. I agree that this is probably not the definition used by some advocates.

It's also at least an order of magnitude more expensive than what Eliezer keeps talking about ($300/year).

Yes. (Well, if you use binary or base 4.)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit