the probability of a 25-year-old dying before their 26th birthday is 0.1%. If we could keep that risk constant throughout life instead of it rising due to age-related disease, the average person would – statistically speaking – live 1,000 years.
That's just not how the relevant model works. Unless there's very good reason to believe we can overcome the limits set by this model, this calculation is like saying
the number of radioactive atoms decaying to stable atoms in this 1kg lump of nuclear waste in the first hour after its formation is
. If we could keep this number constant throughout storage, nuclear waste would - in terms of radioactivity - be completely converted to stable elements in just 3 years.
Although there are some arguments on why significant extension of lifespans might be possible, the relevant model is not even discussed, and thusly I don't think the arguments brought forth are good enough to warrant the claim that 1000 years are possible.
That's the entire point. The premise is, what if we were able to flat-line risk to be what a 25yo experiences rather than be a function of age.
Saw this on HN.
Live forever: Scientists say they’ll soon extend life ‘well beyond 120’