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.

G0W51 comments on Open thread, Aug. 03 - Aug. 09, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: MrMind 03 August 2015 07:05AM

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

Comments (177)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: G0W51 07 August 2015 09:09:30AM 4 points [-]

I have heard (from the book Global Catastrophic Risks) that life extension could increase existential risk by giving oppressive regimes increased stability by decreasing how frequently they would need to select successors. However, I think it may also decrease existential risk by giving people a greater incentive to care about the far future (because they could be in it). What are your thoughts on the net effect of life extension?

Comment author: pcm 07 August 2015 03:05:27PM 5 points [-]

One of the stronger factors influencing the frequency of wars is the ratio of young men to older men. Life extension would change that ratio to imply fewer wars. See http://earthops.org/immigration/Mesquida_Wiener99.pdf.

Stable regimes seem to have less need for oppression than unstable ones. So while I see some risk that mild oppression will be more common with life extension, I find it hard to see how that would increase existential risks.

Comment author: knb 11 August 2015 10:50:26AM 2 points [-]

But why do young men cause wars (assuming they do)? If everyone remains biologically 22 forever, are they psychologically more similar to actual 22 year-olds or to whatever their chronological age is? If younger men are more aggressive due to higher testosterone levels (or whatever) agelessness might actually have the opposite effect, increasing the percentage of the male population which is aggressive.

Comment author: G0W51 07 August 2015 05:33:08PM 2 points [-]

Oppression could cause an existential catastrophe if the oppressive regime is never ended.

Comment author: Username 07 August 2015 12:35:08PM 2 points [-]

Radical life extension might lead to overpopulation and wars that might escalate to existential risk level danger.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 August 2015 03:30:49AM -2 points [-]

Is there anything that can't somehow be spun into increasing existential risk? The biggest existential risk is being alive at all in the first place.

Comment author: G0W51 10 August 2015 04:07:47AM 0 points [-]

Yes, but I'm looking to see if it increases existential risk more than it decreases it, and if the increase is significant.