Thread 16779288

Will I, a health-obsessed zoomer, make it to LEV?

>>16779288 (OP)
Probably not.
Would it even be worth it if you gotta sign up for all these advanced therapies just to keep your walking corpse animated a while longer?

>>16779291
Yes, if I can keep my walking corpse animated until we get to brain uploads or full rejuvenation.

>>16779291
I think humans are focusing on the wrong thing, because of primitive ways of understanding what each individual is, which is aggravated by our genetics (weaknesses), social and political and philosophical and religious perspectives on reality and ... what we actually are. primitive normies have no chance at deeper understanding and they'll focus on prolonging their miserable existence instead of prolly saving their brainstates

lol
lmao

>believes immortality will be found in their lifetime
funny
>believes that, should immortality become possible, it will be available to anyone but the highest spheres of power.
hilarious

>>16779302
You don't want brain uploads. Do you really want your eternal consciousness controlled by tech overlords?

>>16779545
ah cmon that's fucking retarded. who would entertain your simulation and for what purpose? they can just copy-paste the best of the best for any purpose they can think of
so tired of people giving themselves such fucking importance
>omg someone wants me so fucking bad I'm sure of it

>>16779553
Well, its only for eternity. I am sure nothing will go wrong in that time.

>zoomer
No. Your generation and all the ones after are subhumans. You should all be sterilized and euthanized before you destroy the last vestiges of society we have left. Immortality? You can be immortal all you want in hell where your kind belong.

>>16779586
>You can be immortal all you want in hell where your kind belong.
called it
I never met people who hate humans more than radicalized drones. you hate humans and human values with all of your being, it's crazy how most of you end up being zealots. apart from the whole brain damage (scientifically proven) bit which is surely not related

>>16779288 (OP)
Rising life expectancy has never meant that old people are living longer, it means less cripples and stupid children are dying at young ages and instead live into adulthood to pass on their defective genes to future generations.

>>16779288 (OP)
No
Technological progress in general is unlikely to continue in the next century or so

>>16779288 (OP)
Death is a mercy. Even if you could live in peak physical fitness for 400 years, you would come to crave death. I don't mean any retarded heat death arguments, I mean that nobody can live that long and want to keep living without some serious mental illness.

>>16779810
>I mean that nobody can live that long and want to keep living without some serious mental illness.
This is one of the dumbest takes ever and the only reason I can conceive of why it's so common is that it's pure cope.
How often does your mortality even cross your mind? If that's a normal occurrence for you then you're the one with a problem. Most normal people go about their routine alternating between the things they have to do and the things they want to do not even remotely worried about the death that eventually awaits them.
A healthy lifespan of 400 years would just be that but longer. Even if we took it to a million years abd you could experience all life had to offer you'd still enjoy the things you enjoy.
>Wow. It's been like 300 years since I've been to Cancun.

>>16779845
>terminal hedonistbrain
Gruesome.

>>16779288 (OP)
maybe, but you won't be able to afford to replace whatever organ you need and cure any type of cancer or other deadly disease you might contract

>>16779846
It doesn't need to be hedonism. "The things you enjoy" could be all those higher ideals you want to achieve and a million years of self improvement. It doesn't change the idiocy of the "death is a mercy" argument now does it?

>>16779851
>It doesn't need to be hedonism
It becomes hedonism when it's only purpose is keeping your infinite time occupied.

>It doesn't change the idiocy of the "death is a mercy" argument now does it?
I'm more of a "death is a necessity" guy. If immortality was beneficial it would have emerged in evolutionary development a few geochronologic units ago.

>>16779288 (OP)
No and when it does finally happen it'll be restricted to the insanely wealthy for atleast several decades and possibly centuries.

>>16779853
>it's only purpose is keeping your infinite time occupied.
Who said that's the "only" purpose? You're an even bigger retard than the first guy.

>>16779853
>If immortality was beneficial it would have emerged in evolutionary development a few geochronologic units ago.
See above. Evolution does not mean or imply every possible good trait will eventually arise.