The fact that you keep mentioning timescales suggests that you haven't internalized the fact that we are talking about a temperature at which most chemical reactions are effectively stopped.
"Effectively stopped" is not the same as "stopped"; and of course there are other effects that add up over time, such as mechanical damage an even cosmic rays. But I think my biggest mistake was in vastly overestimating the time scale that you're talking about. I assumed that you were thinking in terms of centuries, but you say:
I was thinking more like 10 to 50 years. We're talking ordinary business/marketing/infrastructure network effects, plus relatively near term (as I must insist) incremental scientific advances.
Does this mean that, should you be cryopreserved today, you expect yourself to be successfully revived after 10 to 50 years ? IMO, that's a very strong claim. I want to address it, as well as the rest of your points, but first I want to make sure we're on the same page.
Here you go.
Er, thanks, but that still doesn't help me figure out which of the possible expansions of the acronym you're referencing.
SENS stands for Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence. Being acronym-challenged myself, I certainly understand the occasional agonies involved in working an unfamiliar one out.
From Mike Darwn's Chronopause, an essay titled "Would You Like Another Plate of This?", discussing people's attitudes to life:
Conclusion, graphs, and references in article. As usual, I recommend reading Chronopause.com as Darwin has many good articles; to quickly link a few: