multifoliaterose comments on Years saved: Cryonics vs VillageReach - Less Wrong

19 Post author: handoflixue 01 August 2011 09:04PM

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

Comments (42)

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

Comment author: multifoliaterose 01 August 2011 10:07:02PM *  11 points [-]

If I understand him correctly DanielLC is saying that the cost-effectiveness of donating to VillageReach is greater than that which your post suggests because in the event of a Singularity scenario it could have the effect of allowing 28 people to lead very very long lives rather than just 1 person.

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 02 August 2011 12:29:35PM 2 points [-]

This is an important consideration. However there's the opposite effect that more people in Africa means more competition for already scare food and resources, and more people living anywhere also means all the CO2 that they, their livestock, etc. generate, whereas a frozen person consumes only the electricity for keeping their LN2 cool. If you think the Singularity will take long enough to make lives lost from global warming an important consideration, this is an influence in the direction of cryonics. Whether its enough to balance out the chance of 28 very very long lives is harder to figure out; anyone whose life is saved from climate-related disaster is as likely to live to the Singularity as somone the same age saved by VillageReach.

Comment author: jhuffman 02 August 2011 08:26:16PM *  2 points [-]

Maybe we should start a charity that runs around vitrifying living people who have a large carbon footprint?

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 02 August 2011 11:46:12PM 1 point [-]

That's a clever idea, but it would create perverse incentives. Fortunately, the people with the largest carbon footprints (rich 1st worlders) are already the people with the greatest tendency to sign up for cryonics.

Comment author: DanielLC 01 August 2011 10:32:57PM 2 points [-]

Alternately, you could find another charity to increase the population.

Comment author: Rain 02 August 2011 12:06:39AM 4 points [-]

Alternately, you could find another charity to increase the population.

Like a religion whose central tenant is 'be fruitful and multiply'?

Comment author: handoflixue 01 August 2011 10:12:02PM 2 points [-]

Ahhh, thank you! That makes sense, and is definitely an interesting consideration :)