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.

VAuroch comments on A quick calculation on exercise - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: Elo 23 October 2014 02:50AM

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

Comments (38)

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

Comment author: VAuroch 29 October 2014 12:23:57AM -1 points [-]

If you knew precisely when you would die, and precisely how long you would be unconscious, and the date of your death was immutable except by these two options and your quality of life while aging was totally immutable, then maybe they'd be equivalent. But living your life further in the future increases the expected length of your life and quality of life, as well as getting you massive novelty benefits from living further into the future and seeing what is there.

Death is the cessation of 'you'. All things after you die, are inaccessible to you, regardless of how much you value them. This is why death is the Minimum Fun Location. It is not sleep; sleep is not horrible, just a mildly unpleasant need. You are claiming that having to sleep twice as much across a 100-year lifespan is the same thing as dying at 50, and that's an utterly ridiculous claim.