thescoundrel comments on Open thread, November 2011 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 02 November 2011 06:19PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (209)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (209)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: thescoundrel 14 November 2011 01:50:21AM 3 points [-]

Neil deGrasse Tyson is answering questions at reddit:

What are your thoughts on cryogenic preservation and the idea of medically treating aging?

neiltyson 737 points 5 hours ago

A marvelous way to just convince people to give you money. Offer to freeze them for later. I'd have more confidence if we >had previously managed to pull this off with other mammals. Until then I see it as a waste of money. I'd rather enjoy the >money, and then be buried, offering my body back to the flora and fauna of which I have dined my whole life.

Does anyone else have a weird stroke of cognitive dissonance when a trusted source places a low probability on a subject you have placed a high probability on?

Comment author: Dorikka 14 November 2011 02:39:07AM 3 points [-]

I have never heard of this person before, but if they actually think "offering my body back to the flora and fauna of which I have dined my whole life." is worth mentioning, it sounds like they're victim of a naturalistic bias.

Comment author: MixedNuts 14 November 2011 01:57:16AM 1 point [-]

In this case it just marks Tyson an undiscriminating skeptic. Eliezer has written on the general case of disagreement.

Comment author: lessdazed 14 November 2011 03:16:58PM 0 points [-]

What if, hypothetically, no one has made much money freezing people?

What if, hypothetically, it cost $5 to freeze someone indefinitely? What's the cost at which it becomes worth it, even in absence of it working on a whole mammal?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit