You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Lumifer comments on [LINK] Larry = Harry sans magic? Google vs. Death - Less Wrong Discussion

23 Post author: shminux 18 September 2013 04:49PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (55)

Comments (55)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 24 September 2013 04:08:11PM 0 points [-]

for extreme longevity you would probably have to still find better ways to deal with, cure, or prevent heart attacks, even if we've already "cured aging"

Yes, of course. "Curing aging" by itself does little to help with a variety of fatal diseases. People who don't age will still die from infections, strokes, etc. etc.

Comment author: Yosarian2 24 September 2013 11:55:02PM 1 point [-]

For infections, of course. For things like strokes and heart attacks, it partly depends on what you mean by "aging". Even if your cells aren't aging, if your organs accumulate larger-scale damage over time and eventually fail, would that be considered aging? It's a question of definitions, more then anything else, but I would think it would be.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit