CAE_Jones comments on An alarming fact about the anti-aging community - Less Wrong

30 Post author: diegocaleiro 16 February 2015 05:49PM

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

Comments (65)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CAE_Jones 16 February 2015 06:16:43PM *  27 points [-]

So, you've noticed you are confused, and concluded that the false belief must be "the anti-aging community contains a non-negligible number of rational munchkin types", rather than "storing tissue samples is cheap, flawless, reliable, and useful"?

You say you've asked loads of people. What did they say? "No, I didn't do that. I dunno why."? Did no one have an explanation like "I hadn't thought of it" / "I never heard of it" / "It's poorly advertised and I don't know who to call" / "It's too expensive for too little pay off; let's fund cryonics / rejuvination therapy instead" / "It doesn't actually work the way you think" / anything at all? It sounds like that's what you're saying, but did no one at least try to rationalize it? Even with "That sounds dumb" or just laughing it off?

Not even one rationalization, even a feeble one?

That seems unlikely.

Not just "I'd expect people to be smarter than that", but "I'd expect people to make at least a tiny effort to justify their preference when it is called into question, even if by just saying 'that is my preference'". Maybe your responses were mostly noise, but what sort of noise?

If it's just that people haven't even heard of it, then clearly the solution is to raise awareness. If it's that people aren't getting sufficiently excited, then the solution is to do our own cost/benefit analysis, and if it still works out in favor of tissue-freezing, raise awareness of that.

Comment author: diegocaleiro 16 February 2015 06:34:31PM 1 point [-]

Oh they rationalized it alright. Also cost benefit can't be the excuse of people with more than, say, 10 million dollars and whose main goal is living long.

Comment author: joaolkf 17 February 2015 07:16:38PM 11 points [-]

As the person who first emailed Rudi back in 2009 so you could finally stop cryocrastinating, I'm willing to seriously dig up whether/how this is feasible and how much it would cost iff:

(1) You disclose to me what all the responses you got (which are available to you); (2) I get more than five of those responses which aren't variants of "No, I didn't do that."; and (2) Overall, there is no clear evidence, among the responses or elsewhere, that this wouldn't be cost-effective.

The minimal admissible evidence is things like a scientific paper, a specialist in the relevant area saying it's not cost-effective, or a established fact in the relevant area which has as a clear conclusion this is not cost-effective.

Thank me later.

Comment author: diegocaleiro 17 February 2015 07:26:24PM 5 points [-]

Thanks for that amazing service back in 2009. May the end of my cryocrastination always be with you.

Comment author: The_Jaded_One 01 March 2015 10:45:22AM 1 point [-]

God, I need an anti cryocrastination angel too!

Comment author: joaolkf 01 March 2015 03:33:39PM 0 points [-]
Comment author: RowanE 16 February 2015 08:13:29PM 20 points [-]

You seem to be missing the point of CAE_Jones' comment there. The people you ask about your unconventional idea "rationalizing" why they're not doing something that seems obvious to you is what it feels like on the inside when your "obvious" idea is actually dumb and the people you're asking have good reasons not to be doing it, what makes you so confident that that's not what's going on?