The last line in the article is my favorite:
"Evolution, we could say, has found a simpler solution yet: reproduction. You get new people with the genetic heritage of the species, but neotenous and adaptable to the current environment."
It is ironic to me that death, as a part of the mechanism of natural selection, has brought about creatures who seek to invent methods to eliminate it.
Death, after reproduction, works as a part of a process to advance a given species' levels of fitness.
It is ironic to me that death, as a part of the mechanism of natural selection, has brought about creatures who seek to invent methods to eliminate it.
The irony is that DNA and its associated machinery, as close as it is to a Turing Machine, did not become sentient and avoid the concept of individual death. The universe would make much more sense if we were DNA-based computers that cared about our genes because they were literally our own thoughts and memories and internal experience.
Or perhaps DNA did became sentient and decided to embark on a grand AGI project that resulted in Unfriendly multi-cellular life...
Death, long lives, uploading
Mark Rosenfelder (aka zompist, of language construction kit fame) writes about the advantages and drawbacks of mortality and its alternatives, in fiction and real life. Rosenfelder, as an author, clearly takes Fun Theory very seriously. After discussing the mental and physical decline that age usually entail, he assumes that the most difficult to surmount of these problems will be the loss of mental flexibility and tolerance of novelty. He then uses this obstacle to offer interesting fun-theoretic arguments against uploading and cryonics:
And how he addressed the issue in his own far-future conworld: