Honestly, I wouldn't call that piece interesting at all.
I think it's worthy of a discussion thread, but I expect the discussion to be far more interesting than the article. The article itself is rambling, makes no actual point, and contains many misleading passages. Perhaps it might be interesting to take it apart and find as many failures of thought as possible?
My favourite example so far:
We have come to expect better. Now we want life to go on forever.
Followed by
most of us don't want to live forever
Incidentally, I understood that some deluded individuals who didn't have enough money for the whole body treatment were told they could have their head alone frozen, and expect it to be stitched onto any available body when the time came. Science fiction can't get much creepier.
Let's see. 1. It's vitrification, not freezing. 2. Nobody has proposed stitching heads onto random bodies. The idea is to re-grow the lost organs and tissues from the patient's own DNA. As long as the brain survives there is no rational reason to believe a person is truly dead.
(Edited)
The BBC News recently ran an interesting piece on living forever. They discuss some of the standard arguments against cryonics and transhumanism; overall, the article is pretty critical of both. I suspect most LessWrong readers won't find it convincing, but it's still worth a quick read.