Slashdot Mirror


The Cryonics Institute Offers a Chance at Immortality (Video)

Do you want to be frozen after you die, in hopes of being revived a century or two (or maybe ten) in the future? It can cost less than an electric car. That's what the Cryonics Institute (CI) offers. David Ettinger, today's interviewee, is both the son of CI founder Robert Ettinger and CI's lawyer. In this video, among other things, he talks about arrangements that were made for his father's demise, and how they were able to start the cryopreservation process almost immediately after he expired. Is Cryonics the best chance at immortality for those of us likely to die before the Singularity arrives, and gives all of us the tools we need to live forever? David Ettinger obviously thinks so. (This is Video #1 of 2. The second one is scheduled to run tomorrow. It's an interview with CI Director Andy Zawacki, who takes us into the facility where the frozen bodies are stored.)

254 comments

  1. already been done by deadweight · · Score: 4, Funny

    I know a couple guys whose wives have been freezing cold for awhile and still move around and spend money.........

    1. Re:already been done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately Data is fully functional and equipped when he awakes these wives from their centuries of frost.

  2. Slashvertisement by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Also, it's not immortality if they freeze you after you die.
    Immortality means not to die at all.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    1. Re:Slashvertisement by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While, frankly, I'm okay with resurrection, as a backup, there is no way I'm paying for a service I have to die to use. There is zero contract enforceability.

      Also roblimo and his slashvertisements are all so blatant, it's insulting.

    2. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to worry. Once your cells erupt from the expanding ice, there will be no way to "thaw" you without your body turning into a watery, mushy pile of rancid meat.

    3. Re:Slashvertisement by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Informative

      usually they use a criofluid to suspend the whole system. Essentially your body is made to handle sodium, so they raise the salt content and then freeze you to below activation energy for all destructive reactions. This preserves your body from decay and locks it into a physical and chemical state that's non-destructive; however, resuming biological function is tricky. The reactions in the cells have to start back up again, and the salt levels in your blood need normalization; there needs to be oxygen supply and nutrient; and all macro-biology needs to resume (mainly heart beat and brain activity).

      On the other hand, you'll find out immediately after you die if they have figured all of this out and not gone bankrupt. You'll wake up in the future. Medical care and insurance and longevity treatment covered for at least 2 years plus anything related to the cryo better be included, though.

    4. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pseudoscience-hawking Slashdot's new motto: News for turds, stuff that splatters.

    5. Re:Slashvertisement by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      Medical care and insurance and longevity treatment covered for at least 2 years plus anything related to the cryo better be included, though.

      And anticipation of feline complications. I don't want anything to happen to Mr. Bigglesworth!

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    6. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is zero contract enforceability.

      Then how does a will work? Or are those not actually legally binding?

    7. Re:Slashvertisement by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      . . . there is no way I'm paying for a service I have to die to use. There is zero contract enforceability.

      What about life insurance?

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    8. Re:Slashvertisement by Desler · · Score: 3, Informative

      FYI: You can't be cryogenically frozen until you are legally dead.

    9. Re:Slashvertisement by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      The current methods of cryogenically freezing you will make you legally dead. (That's the problem)

      If they could non-destructively freeze and thaw you, it could be legal on a non-dead person.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    10. Re:Slashvertisement by Desler · · Score: 1

      Well of course the freezing would kill you if you were still alive, but you're already dead at that point anyway.

    11. Re:Slashvertisement by Desler · · Score: 1

      Maybe in part 2 they will freeze roblimo so we have to no longer suffer his shitty posts?

    12. Re:Slashvertisement by Desler · · Score: 1

      Shitty postsand videos, I should say.

    13. Re:Slashvertisement by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Then how does a will work? Or are those not actually legally binding?

      there's limitations what a will can stipulate... in most countries what's done with the body is more like a wish than a legally enforceable demand.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    14. Re:Slashvertisement by Seumas · · Score: 1

      For $100k, I'll turn you into a unicorn after you die.

      Also, who really believes this stuff? Like they don't immediately harvest your organs to install into existing buyers who are just waiting for you to kick it, anyway.

    15. Re:Slashvertisement by Aaden42 · · Score: 1

      If they thawed me out & I never had to shave again? Hmmm.. Two for one!

    16. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intended third-party beneficiaries have the rights of anyone with privity, once their interest vests. In laymans, people that both contracting parties know is intended to benefit from the contract can sue to enforce the contract because they have their own interest that doesn't depend on the other people in the contract.

    17. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      zombie apocolypse?

    18. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with raising the salt content in blood is that it puts you in a coma and likley will kill you. This is because the brain removes water to put the body back in equilibrium after a salt infusion. This is not a good thing. This process will tru to kill you immediately after you come back to life, assuming a future technology makes it possible to do so and someone actually tries it on your dead head. See http://www.livescience.com/37227-man-overdoses-on-soy-sauce.html

    19. Re:Slashvertisement by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      They're pumping you full of cryofluids after you died of something. Either they can fix the effects of the cryofluid and whatever killed you, or they can recreate your brain from the frozen copy, or they're going to leave you in the dewar.

    20. Re:Slashvertisement by sd4f · · Score: 1

      Did you know that for successful organ harvesting, you actually can't be completely dead.

    21. Re:Slashvertisement by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know they claim all this, but without some kind of evidence it really feels like they are just bilking desperate dying people out of $100k or more. There's just too many assumptions. 1) Long term memory and personality is stored in the physical structure of the brain rather than the electrical signals themselves. 2) Even assuming #1, they still assume that the freezing process doesn't damage too many of those structures to prevent recovery. 3) Even assuming #1 and 2 they assume that they can get the brain cold enough fast enough to prevent damage. 4) Even assuming #1,2 and 3 they further assume that the technology will be developed to repair and reactivate a body that is either quite literally freezerburned or completely flooded with anti-freeze compounds. And 5) They again assume that someone would want to and be willing to go through the trouble to do it in 50 or 100 years.

      So, my response is this: Prove the first 4 assumptions valid, and maybe we'll talk. Take a healthy rat, train it on a maze, freeze it for a few months, revive it, put it through the maze again. If it performs on par with how it did before it was frozen at least you've demonstrated the survival of gross motor skills, long term memory, etc, etc.

    22. Re:Slashvertisement by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      1) Long term memory and personality is stored in the physical structure of the brain rather than the electrical signals themselves

      Electrical signals *are* physical. They certainly aren't metaphysical.

      So, my response is this: Prove the first 4 assumptions valid, and maybe we'll talk. Take a healthy rat, train it on a maze, freeze it for a few months, revive it, put it through the maze again. If it performs on par with how it did before it was frozen at least you've demonstrated the survival of gross motor skills, long term memory, etc, etc.

      I don't think anyone is claiming that it can be done now. If it could, presumably you could just be prevented from dying in the first place and would not need to be frozen. The whole point of freezing you is that we *don't* know how to do any of this stuff (possibly including freezing), and maybe someone in the future will have the technology and desire to undo all the damage and reanimate you. No one should be doing this without knowing this is a longshot.

    23. Re:Slashvertisement by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Inigo Montoya: He's dead. He can't talk.
      Miracle Max: Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.
      Inigo Montoya: What's that?
      Miracle Max: Go through his clothes and look for loose change.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    24. Re:Slashvertisement by Roblimo · · Score: 0

      "Also roblimo and his slashvertisements are all so blatant, it's insulting."

      I don't mind if you want to blame me for everything wrong with the world, including /. videos and posts you don't like. After having worked on Slashdot most of the time since 1999, my skin is so thick that nothing you say is going to bother me.

      It's better for you to blame me than someone who might be more easily offended, so please keep it up. :)

    25. Re:Slashvertisement by quantaman · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, you'll find out immediately after you die if they have figured all of this out and not gone bankrupt. You'll wake up in the future. Medical care and insurance and longevity treatment covered for at least 2 years plus anything related to the cryo better be included, though.

      Don't worry, I'm sure they'll have universal healthcare by then.

      And jet packs. Don't thaw me out if you don't have jet packs.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    26. Re:Slashvertisement by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

      To some extent, experiments have been done that provide some fairly convincing evidence for #1-4.

      1. Electrical measurements of brain activity during anesthesia pretty much disprove this one. During heavy anesthetic, the neurons stop communicating and become fairly quite electrically. They become even quieter if you cool the blood.

      2. This is a mostly guess, based on electron micrographs of frozen specimens. When the freezing is done perfectly, the details seem to still be visible. Also, an experiment has been done where a slice of brain tissue was frozen under exotic conditions (by exotic, I mean conditions that can't be reached for an entire brain with existing tech), and the cells came back online and started communicating again upon thawing the slice.

      3. This one is a major problem. It is hoped that the current procedures are fast enough, but faster would be better.

      4. This is based upon a set of assumptions that are fairly solid. Assuming no civilization ending catastrophes, the tools that will be capable of fixing you are almost certainly possible in a technical sense. One caution : the kind of tools that will probably work would be able to "fix" your body from a technical level, but philosophically it is hard to argue if you survived. See, the way to fix it is to slice your brain into many small slices, and to scan these slices at extremely high resolution. Software would reverse most of the freezing damage, and construct a graph in memory of the state of your neural network at death. A hardware emulator would be loaded with this graph, and that's what you'd be - a very good emulation.

      5. This one's just a gamble. No one can predict the future with certainty. One thing that IS absolute, however, is your fate if you don't pay the $100k. Not a penny of that money will do you any good anyway, so...

    27. Re:Slashvertisement by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      They may be physical, but not in the sense an arm is. They are transient in nature, the exact thing that death and freezing stops. They are also directional in nature. Exactly how would someone determine the signal and direction after both are destroyed?

      Added thought: What makes anyone think the future would want them?

    28. Re:Slashvertisement by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      Parent is saying that if these cryogenic promoters actually had a method of reviving people, then cryogenics could be used on living people. They'd be clinically dead during the freezing, but that would legally be no different to a heart-lung transplant or similar high-end surgery which don't count as legal death.

      And if they had such a technique, it would start to be used in medicine and the law would need to be settled. Initially to preserve organs for transplant; allowing proper long-term organ banks. But eventually for emergency preservation of life; such as a soldier wounded in combat, frozen for transport to a facility in the US capable of dealing with their wounds. If such preservation caused legal death, then your life would quickly become a Monty Python sketch: "Cpl. Smith is dead", "No I'm not", "Yes you are", "I'm standing right here!", "Many people saw you die", "But I came back", "Well... that's not really allowed, is it", "Not! really! allowed!?", "Can't have corpses popping back to life all over the place, cause no end of confusion"...

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    29. Re:Slashvertisement by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      The Obama/Boehner deal was 35% of estates over $5m, which applies to 3600 individual estates in the US. The previous levels (the pre-Bush levels that were supposed to kick back in next year) were 55% of estates over $1m, but for some reason Obama gave that away rather than just let it kick back in.

      So if you qualify for the new levels, congratulations on being in the top 0.15% of US wealth and one of the 3600 wealthiest families in the US, and please rest assured that the US government will continue to spread its legs for you and your family like the cheap whore it is.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    30. Re:Slashvertisement by icebike · · Score: 1

      There is zero contract enforceability.

      Its like buying a burial plot. If you are a nobody, you can expect to be dug up, probably within 100 years, but surely within 200. If you are famous, and your headstone is huge enough, you might rest there forever, but you might also have friends or perfect strangers buried on top of you.

      I could foresee records being *cough* lost and bodies going bad and having to be cremated over the centuries.
      I seriously doubt anyone in the future would welcome back any long frozen geezer. Who knows what diseases might be lurking in those bodies.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    31. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks Roblimo, hard to argue for a slashvertisement when so many of the employees are doing it voluntarily!

      Been following Alcor over the last decade and only ever heard of CI never really investigated them. Interesting and worthwhile, thanks!

    32. Re:Slashvertisement by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 2

      Yes electrical signals are transient in nature. They are the sorts of things that freezing (and many other things would definitely interfere with). However it seems that while these signals are definitely part of the state of your consciousness, they are probably not the whole state or even a critical part of the state. For instance when you get severely electrocuted (e.g. struck by lightning) and survive, you're mental state is definitely altered (e.g. some memory loss, disorientation, etc), but not so altered that it is unrecoverable (i.e. you don't start over as a baby with no memories at all). This seems to indicate that much of you're mental state is fairly nonvolatile (e.g. stored in neuronal connections). Getting electrocuted might be like a computer rebooting after not being shutdown properly.

      >Added thought: What makes anyone think the future would want them?

      That is a very real possibility, but all it takes is for 1 person with the right technology at any point in the future to want to bring you back (provided the freezing actually works).

    33. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its like buying a burial plot. If you are a nobody, you can expect to be dug up, probably within 100 years, but surely within 200. If you are famous, and your headstone is huge enough, you might rest there forever, but you might also have friends or perfect strangers buried on top of you.

      One of my friends worked or a cemetery. One of his jobs was to open crypts and use a broom to push whatever was left into a pit in the back to make room for the next person. If the crypt was the kind that didn't have the pit, then they would take the remains and "dispose" of them. According to the policy, he only got to learn what that meant after working for them for 10 years and he only got to do the broom thing because he worked there for five.

    34. Re:Slashvertisement by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Did you know that for successful organ harvesting, you actually can't be completely dead.

      The actual cells can't be dead, but most organs can certainly be harvested from a corpse that's clinically dead.

    35. Re:Slashvertisement by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Anyone know if anyone has ever tried memory experiments with animals that can survive freezing and thawing? I'm not sure exactly how you would do it though. Is it possible to train a frog to do tricks or run mazes or something? If you could, then you could demonstrate that, in principle, memory can survive the freezing process. Of course, it still might be the case that the memory of amphibians and the like isn't stored in the same way as the memory of humans and other mammals.

      They have demonstrated chilled (but not frozen) suspended animation over a period of hours in mice and pigs. Their hearts were stopped completely and they were effectively dead the entire time before being warmed back up. Presumably if memory were stored in ways that requires a continuous refresh, those pigs and mice would have lost their memories. I can't find any details of whether any memory tests were done on those animals however. Pigs and mice are, at least, quite trainable.

      Still, even the pigs and mice in the suspended animation experiments weren't as totally dead as someone completely frozen. There still might have been some undetectable slow process going on keeping their memories going (or, once again, maybe they actually didn't keep their memories).

    36. Re:Slashvertisement by Molochi · · Score: 1

      And that's because freezing kills you anyways, which would be murder or suicide.

      Freezing people is not "suspended animation". Even if the future want's to thaw you out and inject you with magic juice that makes you all better for some reason, your brain cells are probably going to be so fucked up, that you won't even know who you were once they are repaired.

      On the other hand, 28grand to be entombed in LN (with some faint hope of waking up again someday) sounds less silly than a fancy satin lined box in the dirt.

      I'm more of a burn my body and spend the remainder on a wake sorta guy, tho'

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    37. Re:Slashvertisement by anagama · · Score: 2

      If they could non-destructively freeze and thaw you

      This is the part I'm skeptical about. Take two fresh strawberries. Put one in the fridge, put the other in the freezer and freeze it, then pull it out and let it thaw. Get the berry from the fridge and do a taste/texture test. Not even close to the same.

      Something happens to all those cells when they freeze, so even if your brain doesn't turn to jelly when they defrost you, you definitely won't be as tasty after freezing and thawing.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    38. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's put it this way:

      What other options do you believe are available?

      Religion? What if you're one of those individuals capable of rational, critical thinking?

    39. Re:Slashvertisement by Molochi · · Score: 1

      Don't be a fucktard. There are about 10 million individual "millionaires" in the USA. Their kids and grandchildren will inherit that money some day. So say you got 90 million people with a vested interest in no estate tax at any level. That isn't even counting working professionals with poor parents that are investing and saving for their offspring. Every fucking one of them is going to vote for that shit.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    40. Re:Slashvertisement by Molochi · · Score: 1

      Added thought: What makes anyone think the future would want them?

      That's the rub. If you did something still relevant (somebody like Hawking) and I could revive you, fix you up, I'd say "You've got a pass, go play or work or do whatever."

      But maybe in the magic happy utopian future they'd just see a couple of hundred people that wanted to be there and grant their wish.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    41. Re:Slashvertisement by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

      A slow freeze allows ice crystals to grow large, which breaks down the cells. If you freeze something fast enough, those ice crystals don't grow as large, and the cells sustain less damage. I don't know if you can freeze something quick enough to reduce the damage to zero, but it's theoretically possible to keep the damage to a minimum.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    42. Re:Slashvertisement by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      Many of these desperate dying people have been committed to having themselves cryonically preserved since the 1960's and have spent all their lives preparing for this moment. Two I can name in particular are Robert Ettinger and Fred Chamberlain. I might also mention Mike Darwin, who is still breathing and has been active in cryonics for his entire adult life (and before). Many of these people risked jailtime and other punishments to protect others who had already been preserved. So it's not all a scam for uninformed people.

    43. Re:Slashvertisement by dragon-file · · Score: 1

      Then how does a will work? Or are those not actually legally binding?

      there's limitations what a will can stipulate... in most countries what's done with the body is more like a wish than a legally enforceable demand.

      There goes my funeral plans. I was gonna use my money to pay for an awesome rock concert in the cemetery with what ever big name bands are currently still performing (doubt kiss will still be around). It was gonna have fireworks and smoke machines and a laser light show. At the end of the last song of the last band on stage, I wanted my corpse to be launched out of a cannon into an open pit, which a backhoe would promptly fill in. It would have been great.

      --
      Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
    44. Re: Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone payed attention in xfiles class

    45. Re:Slashvertisement by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      Isn't there a way to say "don't show me any Roblimo posts anymore"?

    46. Re:Slashvertisement by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      Yes, for strawberries your statement is accurate. Conveniently, people (and all mammals) have a significantly more complex circulatory system than a strawberry. Part of the pre-cooling perfusion process is to flood your body with chemicals that reduce this mush-forming problem. Then they use a specific cooling regimen to further reduce ice stressing by moving very slowly through the glass transition temperature.

      Even with that, It's not survivable today, and that's where our R&D money goes.

      Disclaimer: I am a CI member and future customer.

    47. Re:Slashvertisement by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      That may be the case in your jurisdiction. I don't know (because I'm not a lawyer) if it's the case in my jurisdiction.

      There's a logical test in there : since this is likely to be a lot of money in running such facilities, there's the possibility of substantial ground rent for a country who hosts such a facility.

      Therefore, there is potential for substantial "squeeze" (bribery, corruption, or just perfectly legal well-paying jobs for the electorate) in persuading local politicians to modify the laws of some small Pacific island nation to allow this sort of treatment. Particularly if it applies only to foreigners, "Let the gringo pig-dogs kill themselves, as long as they pay us to store the meat!"

      I'm not aware of the lawyers of the Cryonics Institute having persuaded any country to permit this. (Counter-example, anyone?)

      Therefore, they don't believe the process works themselves, and it really is a scam.

      Which is what I'd expected all along, but I just hadn't bothered to think about it for 30 seconds, and so hadn't proved (to my own satisfaction) that it is a scam.

      I think I've just found a nice counter-example to the assertion that "there's no such thing as bad publicity".

      Corpsicle, anyone?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    48. Re: Slashvertisement by M.qrius · · Score: 1

      Cryonics Institute is a non-profit, and every employee is required to be signed up for preservation themselves as well. The choice of location for CI is not just politics. They chose the location in a geologically very stable area, to get the highest likelihood of long term preservation. Politically, you also want to be in a stable environment, preventing you from going to just any country that has nice legislation at the moment. In any case, the first points I mentioned bear repeating. All cryonics providers in the world, including CI, are non-profits. Also, for CI, employees need to be signed up with CI to work there, meaning they have to have a stake in making sure everything actually works as intended. This, to me, is proof of their integrity.

    49. Re: Slashvertisement by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      This, to me, is proof of their integrity.

      It could just as well be proof of their stupidity.

      So, CI have their corpseicle store in north Canada, or the centre of Australia? For "geological stability" (which is my territory). And where are they? "MI" (Michigan? Not my country.) That's maybe not quite the epitome of instability, but it's not wildly stable either. Smells of bovine excrement to me.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    50. Re: Slashvertisement by M.qrius · · Score: 1

      It could just as well be proof of their stupidity.

      Hold on there, now you're saying they're stupid, instead of saying they're scammers. Is it possible that you simply don't like the concept and are making up reasons that support your feeling?

      To directly address your concerns, I'm reading through the extended FAQs.[1]
      First off, I have to admit that what I thought I read was Cryonics Institute being based where they are due to low geological risk. However, it seems I read that about Alcor Life Extension Foundation, which is the other non-profit Cryonics preservation service in the US. They detailed their location decision here: [2] Summarizing, it's because of very low risk of natural disaster, availability of major airport facilities, favorable weather (no winter blockages), and low crime. See the link for extended information.

      Doing some quick research, it seems that in terms of seismic activity, Michigan is even safer than Arizona.[3,4] You mention geological stability is your territory, so I'll defer to your opinion on that.

      Why not the North of Canada or the center of Australia?

      I would think the main reasons are: The North of Canada is hard to get to, and frequently inaccessible, which is a problem when time is of the essence. Australia is not populated enough: People from the USA would find it hard to get to, and there may not be enough people in Australia to warrant a Cryonics center there. Australia's laws might also create a hurdle, although I'm not too familiar with that.

      As a final note, I'd suggest interested people have a look around through the public information. All financials are public,[5] the cryopreservation methods used are well detailed,[6] and for every person cryopreserved there is a case report available, detailing both the things that went well and the things that need improvement.[7]

      Cryonics is a thing. The people involved are intelligent, and are working to give the preserved patients the best chance they can at a future. Cryopreservation seems odd at first glance, raising a lot of concerns that need to be addressed. Luckily, these have indeed been addressed. Have a google through the information available, and perhaps you'll find your view shifting!


      [1]
      Cryonics: A basic introduction
      Cryonics: A basic introduction (Continued)
      Cryonics: A basic introduction (Continued 2)
      Cryonics: Why don't we?
      Cryonics Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

      [2] Why Scottsdale?
      [3] Arizona Seismic Hazard Map
      [4] Michigan Seismic Hazard Map
      [5] Cryonics Institute Financial Statements
      [6] Outline of CI Cryopreservation procedures
      [7] The Cryonic Institute's 110th Patient

  3. Welcome to the World of Tommorrow!! by TWiTfan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Okay, I had to say it.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  4. I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't want to live forever, just merely a very very very long time. Is that so much to ask for?

    1. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by lobiusmoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's funny. When I was in my 20's I wanted to live forever. Now, in my 40's, I sometimes wonder if it will ever end.

      --
      "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    2. Re: I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you already do live for a very very long time. Compared, for example, to the humble fruit fly, you are immortal!

    3. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feel free to kill yourself... it's not that hard.

    4. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by lobiusmoop · · Score: 1

      LOL AC, no thanks, having too much fun.

      --
      "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    5. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feel free to kill yourself... it's not that hard.

      Harder than you might expect. People fail all the time.

    6. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      I don't want to live forever, I just want to have more money than the next two richest people in the world combined, and live frugally until the money runs out.

    7. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      You're doing it wrong.

    8. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by cusco · · Score: 1

      I am too, for now. I watched my grandmother succumb to Alzheimer's, and my grandfather is now 94 and essentially unable to do anything for himself. That's too long. My wife and I talked about this before, and once life is no longer enjoyable it's time for it to end. I wonder how many "accidents" where elderly couples drive off a cliff or something aren't actually planned.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    9. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by simula · · Score: 2

      What changed?

    10. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Aonghus142000 · · Score: 1

      Even assuming the brain remains healthy and intact. (My great-grandfather lived to 108 and didn't loose anything memory or wits wise until about 6 months before he died,) there is also the trauma of outliving everyone you know. It takes a special kind of mind to be able to attend the funerals of all of the people you knew and loved in childhood (and even some descendants) and not crack under the strain.

    11. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by non0score · · Score: 1

      Why do people have absolutely no imagination? If the future humanity can revive you through freezing you up like a frozen chicken, why would you assume that, by then, our future humanity haven't developed the technology to reconstruct your body to its 20 year old state? Hell, I'd wager that we'd develop the technology to keep us immortal through stem cells before we figure out how to thaw a frozen mouse and keep its cognitive abilities.

    12. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by non0score · · Score: 1

      And when we finally achieve immortality, we'd only have to suffer through the ones who wishes not to live for ever.

    13. Re:I don't want to be immortal, just ancient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Accidents? It happens but isn't that common to my knowledge. It is however common to stop taking medication, that sort of thing. Some (excruciating) conditions can leave you in a state where, for example, not drinking for a day is fatal (kidney failure) and it's a pretty normal and intentional end to such conditions.

      It's kinda debatable if we should call that suicide. (Is not exercising then suicide as well? Smoking? Not eating your veggies?)

  5. Can I pay when I wake up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they really believe in their technology, they should have no problem with a payment plan that starts when you wake up...

    1. Re:Can I pay when I wake up? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2
      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Can I pay when I wake up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While an interesting idea, the company still has things to pay for now. Like the electricity powering the equipment keeping you frozen, or the employees that make sure it does not malfunction. Plus, unless you're rich and/or have your money invested to keep up with inflation, you'll likely have to go back to school if you want to actually make a living in that future world.

    3. Re:Can I pay when I wake up? by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone has enough money to pay for something 1000 years after the start of services being provided. You'd basically be repaying a loan that has been collecting interest for 1000 years. That's assuming everyone who gets frozen can be reanimated and has enough money to actually pay. If only 50% of the people can be re-animated, then that means each reanimated person needs to pay twice as much to cover the cost.

    4. Re: Can I pay when I wake up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A world that can revive frozen people probably has robots doing all the work anyway.

  6. BS on so many levels by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First, the crude cryonics they use today is not going to work well, and may well not leave anything that can be revived behind.

    Second, why would anybody want to revive some corpses at huge expense when making a few children more is so much easier? Or why would anybody go through the effort of reviving anybody, when the world is over-populated in the first place? Well, maybe if you freeze some truly exceptionally people (like Fields-medal winners), that one may be different, but I doubt it. Everybody else is just going into the trash at some indefinite time in the future.

    And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone? There are a few SF books that use long-term "storage" as punishment for the criminal, and they have it right.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your chilled mushy brain will provide a delicious dessert for the people of the future.

    2. Re:BS on so many levels by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      They need your knowledge of 20th century football to thwart hot evil alien princesses?

    3. Re:BS on so many levels by Entropius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone?

      Because they could meet new people and learn a new world?

      Why would people want to move from Europe to America in the 1700's?

    4. Re:BS on so many levels by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 2

      There are a few SF books that use long-term "storage" as punishment for the criminal, and they have it right.

      Maybe they just really enjoy Taco Bell.

    5. Re:BS on so many levels by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      By then we should already have the technology to stick an earthworm into an intelligent super-suit.

      Oops, wrong franchise.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1: This may or may not be true, but I guarantee you'll get a more educated discussion out of it arguing with cryonics folk than saying it in a setting where nobody has the relevant knowledge to formulate a counter-argument.

      2: Historic relevance, for one. And why not? You claim "the world" is overpopulated. Go ahead and show me any scientific evidence that says, word for word, "the entire world is overpopulated in every single area." You can't; it's bull. Some places are overpopulated; the world as a whole is just fine.

      3: That's not for you to decide. It's my decision. I want the procedure done for my own reasons; your personal misgivings about it mean nothing to me. With regards to the two reasons you gave, my responses are, respectively: I'd rather adapt to change than be dead, and I'd rather move on and make new friends than be dead (this also applies to me pre-cryonization; I'm not going to kill myself when my friends/loved ones start dying, and I should hope you won't, either).

    7. Re:BS on so many levels by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      Imagine someone from the 1500s waking up now. Hey, welcome to the future. All of your morals are horribly outdated, everything you thought you knew about the world is at best laughably incomplete or more likely completely wrong, and the world has changed in every meaningful way. Good luck getting a job, finding a mate, or even crossing the street!

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    8. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would people want to move from Europe to America in the 1700's?

      A number of methods were used to encourage immigration, among them outrageous promises of riches to be had in the new land, prison alternative for convicted criminals, and outright kidnapping.

    9. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can either join the Amish or move to the Middle East. Neither have left the 16th century.

    10. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, they need someone who knows how "Single Female Lawyer" ends.

    11. Re:BS on so many levels by gweihir · · Score: 1

      A) you are an anonymous coward and hence beneath notice.
      B) I expended the time to read your posting nonetheless, and nothing you any is of any value, just as is to be expected of an AC.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:BS on so many levels by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

      Imagine someone from the 1500s waking up now. Hey, welcome to the future. All of your morals are horribly outdated,...

      Welcome to the future. All of your morals are belong to us!

    13. Re:BS on so many levels by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      Two is really the biggest problem. Unless you've done something historically exceptional or somehow racked away money in some sort of structure that won't be immediately raided by your successors, then no one will be interested except maybe some curiosity seekers or people who just want to prove after all this time that it can be done (and is now available for sale to the general public).

      As for three, I would eagerly embrace the chance to see a new world with new advances in science and the arts. It would also be fascinating to see how culture has changed and how my own time period and the years after are viewed through the lens of history.

      Plus, I've relocated across the country before, and finding new people to care about isn't all that hard if you have any social graces, and people we love and care about die or move away all throughout life. You just lose a few more at once when it's your time to go.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    14. Re:BS on so many levels by Seumas · · Score: 1

      It would be fucking amazing. I would settle for living a normal life span, but just one year at a time. Every century, bring me back for one year. By the time I die, I'll have gotten to experience some 8,000 years of man's progression. It would be absolutely fantastic.

      One of the things which makes me the saddest when contemplating death is simply knowing that there is boundless potential humanity will reach but I won't be able to witness. Space travel. Colonization of other planets. Meeting other species. Curing cancer. Creating actual brain-facilitated VR so that you are basically living out all those sci-fi fantasies.

      Instead, with such short lives lived consecutively, you come in with the corded home phone and die with the cell phone. Meh.

    15. Re:BS on so many levels by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      Second, why would anybody want to revive some corpses at huge expense when making a few children more is so much easier?

      On an impersonal level, they'd do it from curiosity, love of 'impossible' challenges, the urge to use a particular related talent in a new/interesting way, a drive to become famous, greed. On the more personal level, they'd be acting on the wish to preserve/'save' somebody that they already know, care about, and/or admire, whether the individual was "great" in society's eyes or just in the eyes of others around them.

      Also, you'd evidently be surprised how many people have those urges so strongly that it replaces/overrides any interest they may have had in reproducing, regardless of how they feel about children in general; in rare cases, it's so powerful that it takes the place of the drives to find a long-term mate and/or have sex. As I once saw one such person remark: why on Earth would I cast aside someone that has already proven to be an asset to others' lives in favor of spending my time/energy gambling on the crappy odds of producing an individual that, with 20+ years of massive effort & money, *might* turn out to be remotely as worthy?

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    16. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freeze your friends. Without their permission!

    17. Re: BS on so many levels by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      Forgot to close the quote tag...trying again:

      Second, why would anybody want to revive some corpses at huge expense when making a few children more is so much easier?

      On an impersonal level, they'd do it from curiosity, love of 'impossible' challenges, the urge to use a particular related talent in a new/interesting way, a drive to become famous, greed. On the more personal level, they'd be acting on the wish to preserve/'save' somebody that they already know, care about, and/or admire, whether the individual was "great" in society's eyes or just in the eyes of others around them.

      Also, you'd evidently be surprised how many people have those urges so strongly that it replaces/overrides any interest they may have had in reproducing, regardless of how they feel about children in general; in rare cases, it's so powerful that it takes the place of the drives to find a long-term mate and/or have sex. As I once saw one such person remark: why on Earth would I cast aside someone that has already proven to be an asset to others' lives in favor of spending my time/energy gambling on the crappy odds of producing an individual that, with 20+ years of massive effort & money, *might* turn out to be remotely as worthy?

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    18. Re:BS on so many levels by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone? There are a few SF books that use long-term "storage" as punishment for the criminal, and they have it right.

      What a sickeningly xenophobic statement. Some people enjoy learning about new cultures, such as a westerner spending time in China or Japan. How would this be any different? I find the prospect exciting!

      That said, this is a blatant rip off on par with the scientologists. So I guess I'll pass.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    19. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of a short story called "Far Centaurus" by AE van Vogt where some astronauts head off to Alpha Centauri only to find that by the time they get there (hundreds of years later) human technology has advanced so much that the star system is already colonized and they can make the trip back to Earth in 3 hours. The astronauts become historical curiousities and have huge difficulty fitting in. Humanity is almost alien to them. They need a specially-trained translator because nobody speaks a language comprehensible to the astronauts, and they are practically considered idiots.

    20. Re:BS on so many levels by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      Imagine someone from the 1500s waking up now.

      Depending on their walk of life, I would not be at all surprised if they had a better work ethic than the average American. There's no reason why a curious and motivated 14th-century person couldn't learn enough to get along in modern society, especially if they get some initial help.

      If somebody was offering one-way trips to 2500 right now -- assuming that I was convinced that the technology involved would actually work -- I'd do it without hesitation. There's plenty of us without any particularly strong ties who would go for something like that -- and many reasons beyond the whole "uncurable disease" one.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    21. Re:BS on so many levels by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      That would be the 16th century, but not much better I would argue.

      1. There are about a million and a half bewildering and contradictory laws that we can't even make sense of. Good luck not getting arrested for doing something you thought was just fine.
      2. Women are not property and have equal rights to vote, hold office, and own property. Mind==blown right there. Blacks are not subhuman mud people, and have equal rights. Animals have legal rights too. People can marry members of the same sex in some places, but not others.
      3. Alcohol is sort of legal, but with hundreds of weird laws. Most of other drugs are illegal for some reason. We can't explain why.
      4. The government has far more power than it did under your monarchy, can see almost everything you do, can arrest you for pretty much no reason, and we voted this government in office willingly.

      Just look at elderly people today. They can barely keep up with technology, and they were HERE for it! Many of them are disgustingly racist and sexist by today's standards. They cling to the music, styles, and culture from their youth like it's still 1940. And you think someone born in 1530 would fare better than someone born in 1930?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    22. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It would be absolutely fantastic.

      The thing is, you don't know that at all. It my be utterly awful.

    23. Re:BS on so many levels by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Second, why would anybody want to revive some corpses at huge expense when making a few children more is so much easier?

      Why would we assume it is going to be expensive forever? Presumably technology could make such a thing possible and eventually inexpensive.

      Or why would anybody go through the effort of reviving anybody, when the world is over-populated in the first place?

      Why do we need to be revived into bodies that take up the same amount of space and resources? Why would it still be the case that we are stuck on earth?

      And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone?

      Why would anybody want to exist? It's part of our programming as products of evolution. Even if everyone I knew was gone, I'd still enjoy being alive, especially if I got to see what the future was like. It's not like I am incapable of forming new relationships. If I absolutely hated it, I could refreeze myself or commit suicide.

      There are a few SF books that use long-term "storage" as punishment for the criminal, and they have it right.

      How is it punishment if you are not even conscious during that time? It would be like going to sleep one day and waking up 1000 years in the future. This is not the same as serving a 1000 year prison sentence.

    24. Re:BS on so many levels by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      She has lots of sex.

    25. Re:BS on so many levels by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the insight, Brooks from Shawshank Redemption, but some people don't actually mind change, new knowledge, luxuries made possible by technology, and different cultures (especially ones in the future). Who knows maybe a 21th century human might get some novelty points with the opposite sex in the future. Or maybe they can just give you one of their brain implants to quickly bring you up to speed like in the Matrix.

      And if you will remember from the same movie, Red went from "Hope is a dangerous thing" to learnign from Andy that "hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies."

    26. Re:BS on so many levels by idontgno · · Score: 1

      True.

      On a hot summer's day, the cheerful music and bright bell-ringing of the ice brain truck will bring crowds of happy, yelling, excited zombie children from all up and down the block. It'll be a big part of their fond child-zombiehood memories.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    27. Re:BS on so many levels by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      Yeah, obviously I had a brainfart on translating "1500s" to a century.

      As far as the societal-level changes that you mention go -- there are still a lot of places in the world where attitudes and culture are a lot closer to 1500s Europe than they are to modern society in the US or Europe. But people can and do come from those places and manage to assimilate reasonably well.

      I don't think that the comparison with "elderly" people is completely relevant, given that the original statement was that they wouldn't be able to hold down a job. Elderly people, for the most part, don't hold jobs either. It's fair to assume that someone who chooses to be put to sleep for five hundred years expects that they have a fair amount of time remaining to them, and so we're probably looking at people that are capable of learning new skills and using them.

      (Yes, the whole "freeze Dad after he's dead" scenario doesn't really fit there -- but that's kind of a silly idea in the first place; I don't think that's really going to catch on.)

      There are a lot of jobs that people do that don't necessarily require much, if any, use of modern technology; most obviously many jobs that involve manual labor. For that matter, how many non-elderly people really keep up with "technology" in more than a superficial way?

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    28. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you think someone born in 1530 would fare better than someone born in 1930?

      A young and intelligent 1530'er against a decrepit old 1930'er? Sure. The brain goes to shit as you get old, that's why old people can't adapt to the times. A young person from 1530 wouldn't have that problem. At least for a considerate 1530'er. It's possible that an out-going/aggressive 1530'er would get into a duel or assault someone at seeing something apparently unacceptable going on before the person could be socialized.

    29. Re:BS on so many levels by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Morality? The first few that are unfrozen will insist on a matter of principal that the remainder be revived. Besides, isn't it more ethical to resume an existing life than create a fresh one?

      Or you could use the pragmatic argument that there probably won't be many people frozen. And the handful who are will have very valuable historical knowledge and insight (imagine talking to someone from the 1800s).

      --
      I stole this Sig
    30. Re:BS on so many levels by khallow · · Score: 1

      All of your morals are horribly outdated, everything you thought you knew about the world is at best laughably incomplete or more likely completely wrong, and the world has changed in every meaningful way. Good luck getting a job, finding a mate, or even crossing the street!

      And? So what's the difficulty supposed to be here? If you look at who was around then (or for that matter now), they could either crawl in a hole while wailing about the demons around them or they could embrace this change and thrive. I bet the people who would make such gambles are of the latter sort. And no offense to people of this era, but modern society is not hard to figure out.

    31. Re:BS on so many levels by khallow · · Score: 2

      Yea, you might not like it like. Always a good reason not to do anything.

    32. Re:BS on so many levels by khallow · · Score: 1

      Second, why would anybody want to revive some corpses at huge expense when making a few children more is so much easier?

      Because otherwise they don't get paid for reviving those corpses?

      And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone?

      I don't get what the problem is supposed to be here. It's not like you've completely lost the ability to make new friends and know new people.

    33. Re:BS on so many levels by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      And third, why would anybody reasonably want to be unfrozen, when the world is massively changed and everybody they knew and cared about is gone?

      Because they could meet new people and learn a new world?

      And as George Burns replied, when asked what it was like to be 99, "It beats the alternative".

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    34. Re:BS on so many levels by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      How is this so different to people who emigrate to a different country? Particularly people who migrate from poor shitty third world countries to rich first world countries. New laws, new culture, new language and customs. Your skills are out of date and you are even poorer and worse educated than you were when you started.

      And yet...

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    35. Re:BS on so many levels by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Why would people want to move from Europe to America in the 1700's?

      you're either trolling or fairly ignorant of the past history. they either escaped famine or persecution.most people who emigrated from europe to america in 1700 to early 1900's did it simply for a chance to eat more. certainly pretty much none of them did it to meet the natives...

      now, historians might want to. but for even those it would be most useful if they had already lost all the records from this time which also happens to be the time of most records of all time...

      pretty much the only reason to wake them up would be boredom. the other reason would be to save on the electricity bill of keeping the coolers running..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    36. Re:BS on so many levels by Nethead · · Score: 1

      You come in with the World Book Encyclopedia and now exist with the Internet. I think we got fucking lucky.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    37. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't read any legal texts from 1530 but if you go back to 1230 in the region where I live most of your points are untrue/invalid.

      If women had the right to vote can be argued. The laws explicitly stated that the women had the right to attend meetings without being stopped, if they (or anyone else for that matter) actually had the right to vote is unspecified.
      Alcohol was clearly legal. It was also specified that crimes that happened in the tavern (barfights) shouldn't be fined as hard as if it happened elsewhere.

      There were also many other interesting laws. For example property borders could be legally infringed upon for various reasons. If you wanted to raise a mill and the border was in the middle of a stream it was still allowed to use both sides of the stream.
      If it was hard to tell for sure where in the forest the border between your and your neighbors property was then it was legal to fell up to three oaks on his property. The law essentially specified an amount of slack that made sure that you didn't have to put up markers and fences in the forest.

    38. Re:BS on so many levels by XcepticZP · · Score: 1

      That's the beauty of it, not it's flaw. I WANT to be in a society I do not understand anymore. I want to be amazed. I want to be enthralled and overwhelmed.

      I want the future, even if it's for a few days. And currently, this is the best way to do it.

    39. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I very reasonably want to be unfrozen in the future. I'm very curious about what the future will be like. I am very adaptable. Getting used to massive changes would be worth it for the new knowledge and technology I would likely have access to. Losing everyone I know and care about would be difficult, but I am a very self reliant person. I know I could start again with no-one. The choice is either a possibility at a new life in the future or permanent death. It doesn't seem reasonable to complain about how crappy the new life in the future might be - if you suffer buyer's remorse, suicide will still be an option.

      The rest of your comment is about the likelihood of making it to the future, failing to take into account your own point that the world will have massively changed. The technology required for revival would involve highly advanced automated nanotechnology. Our current notions of labour, cost, effort and value will not survive the development of such technology. It's not unreasonable to guess that intangible things like human life, memories and history will have some value in comparison to the rather abundant materials and energy required to revive a body.

      As a side note, I don't really understand your point about over-population. Have you seen India? There's 1.2 billion people in a country smaller than Alaska. If we had powerful automated nanotechnology, I expect we could fit several orders of magnitude more people on this planet, not to mention all the other planets in the galaxy, nor the possibility that future transhumans won't go around mindlessly breeding like rabbits.

    40. Re:BS on so many levels by Svenia · · Score: 1

      For some of the older readers, perhaps. Some of us came in right when the internet became readily accessible (1980's) and thus while we don't necessarily (at least not all of us) take it for granted, we also don't understand the true depth of our parent's generation who had to do their school papers via encyclopedia and printed texts. In that instance, the analogy of the corded phone to cell phones would be much more appropriate.

    41. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what a fantastic counter-argument you've made! An ad hominem followed by a complete lack of a refutation! As expected of a prick.

    42. Re:BS on so many levels by twocows · · Score: 1

      Since you hate ACs so much, let me say this one from the heart: you're the kind of elitist asshole that makes me wish I could punch people through the internet. If you had anything worth saying, you would have said it. You didn't, and that's telling. So fuck off.

    43. Re:BS on so many levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I imagine historians of today would be very excited if they could revive even an insignificant peasant of Ancient Egypt's Old Kingdom. If they turned out to be a doctor, priest, tax collector, or granary scribe - even better!

      Also keep in mind that with the progress of technology, if something is at all physically possible it will eventually become trivial to do.

  7. If I wake up old and disabled or demented... by ackthpt · · Score: 2

    I'm not seeing an advantage here. If I wake up in an age with a lobster, cyclops, rastafarian bureaucrat and obnoxious robot, I might be inclined to exclaim, "Excellent news everyone!"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:If I wake up old and disabled or demented... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

      I'm not seeing an advantage here. If I wake up in an age with a lobster, cyclops, rastafarian bureaucrat and obnoxious robot, I might be inclined to exclaim, "Excellent news everyone!"

      More likely you'll wake up to find you're now Holly, as that process is a tad cheaper than full biological revival.

    2. Re:If I wake up old and disabled or demented... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I forgot to mention the other part: if they did revive your body, you'd likely wake up to find your body only had weeks to live, as your it would be defenseless against the "modern" microorganisms it would encounter.

    3. Re:If I wake up old and disabled or demented... by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I forgot to mention the other part: if they did revive your body, you'd likely wake up to find your body only had weeks to live, as your it would be defenseless against the "modern" microorganisms it would encounter.

      Because evolution happens so fast in 500 years? Yeah the microorganisms might change, but I highly doubt that 10 generations is that big of a deal for humans. ie: It's a long time with respect to technology, but not a long time with respect to human genetic drift.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    4. Re:If I wake up old and disabled or demented... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I forgot to mention the other part: if they did revive your body, you'd likely wake up to find your body only had weeks to live, as your it would be defenseless against the "modern" microorganisms it would encounter.

      Because evolution happens so fast in 500 years? Yeah the microorganisms might change, but I highly doubt that 10 generations is that big of a deal for humans. ie: It's a long time with respect to technology, but not a long time with respect to human genetic drift.

      What does human physiology have to do with it? If people 10 generations ago were exposed to the pathogens we take for granted, they'd kill them... the "common cold" would likely wipe out anyone from the 1800's in short order. The issue isn't human genetic shift, but viral mutation.

  8. First thought by dtmos · · Score: 2

    Ted Williams would roll over in his freezer if he read this. At least, his head would. . . .

  9. Re:Welcome to the World of Tom Tomorrow! by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    Okay, I had to say it.

    Sparky the Penguin says, "Hi!"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  10. There's only one path to immortality... by SSonnentag · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    The Bible outlines the one and only path to immortality. All other attempts are futile.

    1. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by deadweight · · Score: 4, Funny

      I know people that read the Bible and are now dead. Do they get a refund or what?

    2. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I know people that read the Bible and are now dead. Do they get a refund or what?

      Probably not; the people who wrote the Bible were long dead before it was compiled. I think the refund would be void based on "breach of warranty" anyway.

    3. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by deadweight · · Score: 2

      Besides for THAT, AFAIK the Bible does not really say you won't die, it just shows a way to a better zip code after the fact. Just like a time-share sales deal, you're going to have to sit throug the whole presentation to get in ;)

    4. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I know people that read the Bible and are now dead. Do they get a refund or what?

      Hey, it never said you get to keep your terrestrial flesh-sack.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      As soon as one groups of wackos peddle their fraudulent promises, the others feel motivated to do the same.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I read the bible (well, partially, never read anything quire this badly written, boring and disconnected from reality before or after), and it strikes me as ye old pyramid scheme, built entirely on hot air and the belief of the gullible...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by nbauman · · Score: 1

      It's an acquired taste, like roquefort cheese.

    8. Re:There's only one path to immortality... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Bible outlines the one and only path to immortality. All other attempts are futile.

      But the Tooth Fairy has been around as long as your silly Bible and I have more evidence of her existence than you do of your evil god. After all, I've found $0.50c pieces under my pillow in the morning plenty of times in return for teeth I've left there the night prior.

      Where's your evidence for the stupidity you munters preach beyond 'the Bible says so' then?

  11. Everything old is new again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember when the cryonics got to be a big fad during the late 80's early 90's.

    Made alot of people really rich.

  12. You misspelled "tomorrow!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had to say that.

    1. Re:You misspelled "tomorrow!" by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      He didn't. By the time you get unfrozen, the World Leader will be Tom Morrow.

    2. Re:You misspelled "tomorrow!" by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

      I thought the world leader would be Tom Riddle.

  13. Cliche by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bright idea !!!!!

  14. Make sure they have redundant power supplies... by Drewdad · · Score: 1

    Because I don't want to wake up with freezer burn.

  15. The only freezer... by Drewdad · · Score: 2

    ...where things are spoiled before they get preserved.

  16. BUG JACK BARRON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's not off topic. look it up

  17. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by Entropius · · Score: 1

    If someone walked into an archaeology lab and said "Hey, we found this Neanderthal in the ice, and I think we can fix him" don't you think they'd give it a go, especially if they knew it would work?

    It's likely that once society has advanced enough that we can revive geezercicles, we'll not begrudge them the expense of doing so.

  18. Useless idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do i care once i am dead!!!!! Useless stuff...This is another shitty idea to encash people's endless greed and desire....

  19. Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival co by ad454 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Permanent brain damage starts within 5 minutes of not receiving red blood cells with oxygen. So you would have to be frozen before then, and in such a way as to prevent ice crystalization from permanently damaging cells, which is not done with current cryogenic techniques. Otherwise you would lose so much of your personality, intellect, memories, and consciousness from brain damage, that even if they could regenerate all of that grey matter in the future, your brain would no longer be you, but would be someone else. (So what is the point?)

    Aside from that, no matter how cheap it is to freeze someone, it's is likely going to cost a lot more to revive someone who is frozen, and regenerate their body into a functional state. How many people looking at cryogenics are budgeting for revival costs? Maybe they hope the future will be some socialist utopia, which is funny considering the global tend for wealth concentration and reduction of public services, including healthcare for the living.

  20. Quack science is for quackers by chuckinator · · Score: 1

    Nailed it in one. Quack science is for quacks, and no amount of explaining why it's quackery will convince them otherwise.

    1. Re:Quack science is for quackers by repka · · Score: 1

      Nailed it in one.

      More like in three. And they are not the only issues. And all of them are addressed. Go read Wikipedia or something.

      To me the the options are quite simple: you either shell out some cash and there's a small chance of you being reanimated, or you don't and you're gone.

    2. Re:Quack science is for quackers by chuckinator · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to use wikipedia as a source? Do you have specific articles that you're citing instead of just firing off some back handed, flippant comment that I should go read something to educate myself without bothering to tell me what specific article I should read to cleanse myself of this profane ignorance. What are these other issues you speak of? How are they addressed? Please, show me your empirical evidence so I may evaluate your results using the scientific method. Do these ethereal wikipedia articles tell me what the issues are and how they're addressed? Please, oh-great-oracle of wisdom and truth, enlighten us poor, ignorant masses with the pearls of wisdom that drop from your lips.

  21. The 1970s called, they want their article back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously. Cryonics has been around since the dark ages (pre Unix/Moon Landing/Arpanet). Cryonics Institute almost as long.

    Wake me up when they sucessfully freeze and reanimate a mammal, even a mouse.

  22. Extraordinary claims by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

    Let me pull out a rhetorical stick I've been beaten with more than once: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

    Show me the evidence that ressurecting a dead organism of any kind -- even a bacterium, even a plant -- will ever be possible. *Ever.*

    (crickets chirp ...)

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Extraordinary claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      human embryos used for in-vitro fertilization.

    2. Re:Extraordinary claims by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Let me pull out a rhetorical stick I've been beaten with more than once: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

      Show me the evidence that ressurecting a dead organism of any kind -- even a bacterium, even a plant -- will ever be possible. *Ever.*

      (crickets chirp ...)

      On the other hand, if the brain can be scanned, it may be possible in the future to model the body in a new container. This information could still possibly be extracted from the existing popsicle, even with cellular degeneration due to crystallization (computers of the future could trace back the degeneration to reconstruct the original state).

    3. Re:Extraordinary claims by JF_Daddy · · Score: 1

      Show me the evidence that ressurecting a dead organism of any kind -- even a bacterium, even a plant -- will ever be possible. *Ever.*

      (crickets chirp ...)

      If by 'dead', you mean frozen, take a look at sperm banks. Fertilized eggs are routinely frozen as well. (Not that every sperm or fertilized egg is successfully 'thawed', but many are.)

    4. Re:Extraordinary claims by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1, Funny

      human embryos used for in-vitro fertilization.

      Kind of hard to resurrect that which is not yet alive, dink.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:Extraordinary claims by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

      How 'dead' do you want the organism to be?

      Plenty of organisms can survive nontrivial periods of complete metabolic shutdown, combined with some amount of cellular damage, and rehydrate and go on without significant trouble. Tardigrades are probably the most charismatic ones (survives 10 days of unprotected exposure to spaceflight and looks like an adorable little alien bear!); but extremophilic bacteria are even tougher.

      Even humans will (with odds lousy enough that you don't want to try it; but good enough that documentation is available) survive short periods of total circulatory shutdown or longer ones of inactivity in very cold water.

      'Resurrection' of an organism in a more advanced state of damage (or an organism for which precise brain configuration is considered important) is likely more fundamentally problematic. Even if you had indistinguishable-from-magic nanobots and the option to rebuild atom by atom, if you don't have somebody's 'correct' neural state on file, there are any number of configurations that would work; but wouldn't be the person you are trying to revive.

    6. Re:Extraordinary claims by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Since you're cryogenically frozen only after your death, "dead" in this context doesn't mean "frozen" but "your life functions terminated".

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    7. Re:Extraordinary claims by Gavrielkay · · Score: 1

      Did you really say that? Of course an embryo is alive. The cells may not have differentiated enough to have consciousness yet, but they are alive. The viable living cells that will lead to a pregnancy once thawed and implanted are indeed an example of successfully reviving living tissue and having it thrive.

      The big distinction here is that the cells are fast frozen while still alive. If they experienced cell death (by whatever scientific definition applies) and are then frozen, chances are you'd just end up with thawed dead cells.

    8. Re:Extraordinary claims by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Did you really say that? Of course an embryo is alive.

      Yea, I guess I should have phrased it differently:

      Kind of hard to resurrect that which has yet to die, dink.

      Better?

      The big distinction here is that the cells are fast frozen while still alive.

      Hm. Well, since the term 'resurrection,' when applied to human life, specifically refers to bringing the dead back, perhaps for clarification sake they should use a different term...

      Suspended animation always had a nice ring to it, but doesn't really cover the waking-up part... OOH! I've got a good one: Persistence! It makes sense, and is totally Spock!

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    9. Re:Extraordinary claims by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Fail. They are frozen _alive_, otherwise the whole thing would not work. 1 minute with Google could have told you that. But I guess that goes beyond your capabilities.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re:Extraordinary claims by cusco · · Score: 1

      There are a dozen or more species of frogs which can freeze solid in the winter, which is about as dead as dead can be, only to thaw out and revive in the spring. Seventy percent of the water in their body turns to ice, and yet a few months later the frogcicle is merrily eating your crickets.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    11. Re:Extraordinary claims by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

      The last point is arguable. The nanorobotics would be permanent nanoscale fixtures built into a large machine, they would not wander around freely like in science fiction. Given that micromachined parts work today (a common example is the mirror array in certain kinds of projectors), nanomachined parts seem probable in the future.

      Furthermore, your brain has an awful lot of redundant circuits and connections. If you were rebuilt atom by atom, it is possible that the person revived would be "close enough" to the original to satisfy people who knew the original.

    12. Re:Extraordinary claims by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Your examples actually work very much against the premise that this would work on humans. We cannot encyst ourselves or self-altar our internal organization and chemistry, both of which your references do to accomplish the hibernation..
      >BR>

    13. Re:Extraordinary claims by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Your examples actually work very much against the premise that this would work on humans. We cannot encyst ourselves or self-altar our internal organization and chemistry, both of which your references do to accomplish the hibernation..

      Oh, I'm very pessimistic about it working in humans, without truly remarkable advances (especially in neuroimaging before the subject dies, so you have something to work from); but SirGarlon asked "Show me the evidence that ressurecting a dead organism of any kind -- even a bacterium, even a plant -- will ever be possible. *Ever.*" and it seemed worth pointing out that a decent number of bacteria, and some larger organisms, achieve something close to resurrection without outside assistance. There are some interesting preliminary results on induced hibernation in mice (apparently, gassing them with hydrogen sulfide isn't always bad for their health...) Obviously, organisms that do it naturally have an advantage; but their existence suggests that the development of external assistance might be possible in principle.

      For humans, though, where the major interest would be in preserving neural behavior with a high degree of accuracy, I'm not particularly optimistic about keeping bit rot at bay aggressively enough to still have 'the person' available to thaw at a later time. For other organs, you can handwave as much damage as you think future medical nanites or pluripotent stem cells or whatnot can fix; but the more brain structure you lose, the more underdetermined the hypothetical thawing process will be. If your regrowth/repair tech were good enough, you could get somebody out of the process; but if that somebody isn't the same as the person you iced, both being preserved and deicing the preserved get a lot less interesting.

    14. Re:Extraordinary claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ok. In most cases, if the revived subject can successfully ask 'What?' and "Where's the tea?" it will be considered a success.

    15. Re:Extraordinary claims by Umuri · · Score: 1

      The russians did it, to bad most research along this vein cannot be pursued due to ethics boards.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=739DPi7dAOM

      --
      You never realize how much manually made unmanaged "linked" lists suck, till you have src.link.link.link.link...
    16. Re:Extraordinary claims by non0score · · Score: 1

      Exactly -- I am who I was. I would be fine waking up with my cognitive state slightly distorted...at least I'd still be "more or less" myself and feel that my existence continues.

    17. Re:Extraordinary claims by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

      Cryonics, when performed properly, is done at the point of LEGAL death, not biological death. The trick is, the very moment a person's heart stops, they are legally dead. Ideally, a cryonics team gives them CPR and bypass, and a drug that prevents their heart from restarting (even though it very well might if the CPR and bypass are done well). They are biologically quite alive at this point. And, agents are given that make their cells resistant to the freezing, ideally, non toxic agents that don't kill cells in samples. (the frost inhibitors are a special molecular that stops ice crystal growth in modern solutions)

        And the basic technique - freezing in liquid nitrogen - can preserve smaller organisms perfectly, such that they can be thawed out and revived decades later.

      That's the idea. For many reasons, it often does not go this well. But, done right, it isn't freezing a dead body, it is pausing a living one.

    18. Re:Extraordinary claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More importantly, considering the changes that take place in a living person by the second -- would be at least as much the original as he has ever been at any point...

      There would, subjectively, be the discontinuity that would be rather existentially uncomfortable for most people, but I really don't see why it should be. You experience it every night. It's called sleep. Or "the little death" if you prefer.

  23. bullshit by zr · · Score: 0

    i call bullshit

  24. Who says things will be better? by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

    Or you'll like what you fine when you thaw out? Corpsicles in Sci Fi

    I specifically remember reading Larry Niven's "Rammer."

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
    1. Re:Who says things will be better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a similar take on the subject, Allen Steele's "A King of Infinite Space".

  25. Disaster waiting to happend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course a lawyer is hawking this as progress. So what happens when you die today? You are declared dead, your posessions are split among surviving relatives according to your will and the laws of whatever country you live it. Let's say that 100 years from now, you're revived. Now what? You're basically peniless, since your possessions are long gone. OK, so you leave a trust for yourself. Again, I can't see you surviving relatives lawyers leaving this intact. I don't believe that any government in the world would leave it alone either. Just a bad idea all around.

    1. Re: Disaster waiting to happend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just Shit....

  26. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (-1, Correct)

  27. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not if they found a million Neanderthals, all of whom would want jobs and a place to live.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  28. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    It's likely that once society has advanced enough that we can revive geezercicles, we'll not begrudge them the expense of doing so.

    How do we know that "once society has advanced enough," they won't simply decide that the geezercicles aren't worth the time or energy? Or, if they do decide reviving an ancient relic of a bygone era (one they probably won't be able to communicate with, any more than we could communicate with a caveman), what makes you think they'll use the person as anything but a laboratory rat?

    I suppose the point I'm trying to make is 2-fold - 1, some shit just ain't worth the effort, and 2, be careful what you wish for.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  29. Larry Niven, World out of Time by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

    That book might give you an idea why cryonics might not be a good idea. Even if it works.

  30. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    budgeting for revival costs

    You might be surprised at how much you earn when investing for 500 years.

  31. Sounds like vaporware... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, um, Iceware? Guess that depends on how cold they keep you.

  32. Modern mummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think about it, the reasons are pretty much the same. They would probably even have used cryogenics if it was available.

    1. Re:modern mummies by dsoodak · · Score: 1

      sorry about the anonymous comment of same name...didn't realize I wasn't logged in.

  33. Why would the future wake us up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Scenario:: You are immortal but we have destroyed all our resources so you are trapped on a polluted resource planet with 50 billion other undying souls. Enjoy.

    There are a number of things that would have to happen before the future would consider using frozen bodies for anything other than solyent green.

  34. makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, I have cancer, and not the kind that you get better from. I feel like I am maybe 5 years away from some sort of cure or treatment for me. Cryonics makes sense for someone like me. Unfortunately, the techniques we have now suck. I would have thought a rich billionaire would support research for something like this, but the last time I looked at research, the best they could do is revive animals after a short time.

  35. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I'd like to order a large pepperoni pizza. The name is I. C. Wiener. Please deliver to the Cryonics Institute.

  36. modern mummies by dsoodak · · Score: 1

    If you think about it, the reasons are pretty much the same. They probably would even have used cryogenic technology (possibly with a long-half-life nuclear battery) if it was available

  37. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "As to prevent ice crystallization from permanently damaging cells, which is not done with current cryogenic techniques."

    This is untrue. There are methods in use currently that prevent crystallization. All are poisonous, but the hope is that by the time we're able to reverse the process, we'll be able to do something to negate that. And poison's not doing any harm while you're frozen, anyway.

  38. It's not that hard by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    I put a fly in the freezer for a week, let it unfreeze on the table at room temperature after that. After an hour or two, it flew away.

    The weird thing is, a week later I received a job offer from Veridian Dynamics.

    1. Re:It's not that hard by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      I work in a fly lab. We kill thousands of flies each week... by freezing them. I know you were joking, but it's surprising how badly insects handle being frozen.

    2. Re:It's not that hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who lives north of the winter snow line, I for one am very happy that insects don't handle being frozen.

  39. Of course. by Seumas · · Score: 1

    Who doesn't want immortality? The lifespan of the average person is fucking bullshit. It's just enough to get a taste and not enough to satisfy. Unfortunately, freezing you after you die is a problem. The damage the freezing does to you is a problem. The cost of doing the entire body is a problem. The probability of something going wrong with the storage and maintenance of patients for hundreds or thousands of years is a problem. Should everything work out, you then have to realize that when we are finally able to reach this potential, nobody will want to bother bringing you back to life (and, in fact, may legally be forbidden from doing so). The last thing people who may have nearly infinite life would want to do is bring back people who have no connection to them (because it'd be hundred of years and not just a few decades) to compete for precious resources in the face of ever-growing populations.

    1. Re:Of course. by phocutus · · Score: 1

      That's called "life" yo. Just now figuring that out?

    2. Re:Of course. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as nearly infinite. If it's not infinite, it's negligible by comparison.

  40. Define death. by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    Also, it's not immortality if they freeze you after you die.
    Immortality means not to die at all.

    Define death.

    It used to be that you died when your heart or breathing stopped. But now we can restart both. We even stop them regularly to repair the organs in question. Even brain death is problematic, when some drugs or conditions like hypoxia can temporarily shut down electrical activity. This is one reason that most hospitals require multiple checks a few hours or even a full day apart before declaring legal death. We are constantly pushing against the boundaries of what death is.

    So, if your body fails, your brain is frozen, and you are repaired at a later date into a functional, conscious state, then did you ever really die?

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    1. Re:Define death. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can probably set a safe upper bound at when the maggots are having trouble finding another bite to eat in the skull cavity.

  41. I don't think you want that. by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    If they really believe in their technology, they should have no problem with a payment plan that starts when you wake up...

    Pray that never happens.

    Welcome to Life: the singularity, ruined by lawyers

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  42. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might be surprised at how likely you are to lose all your money, either through normal market forces or by your trustee's fraud, when investing for 500 years.

  43. Short film "We Will Live Again" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi -

    For even more on the topic, I just saw this fascinating short film about the subject at the Traverse City Film Festival:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2555152/

    - Tom

  44. Say What? by reluctantjoiner · · Score: 1

    An embryo is a small collection of cells, which are most definitely living. The act of freezing halts cell division and replication. It's not as if the mother's soul reanimates a dead embryo when it's implanted in the womb.

    1. Re:Say What? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Yes, thanks for being the second person to point out my poor choice of phrasing.

      No, seriously, I hate echo chambers - can't fix what you don't know is broken, amirite?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Say What? by reluctantjoiner · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has done without an editing feature for so long, I think it will never be implemented for fear of ruining it's "retro" feel. Ah well, our redundancy will have to remain on record.

  45. One way to lower the cost by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

    Turn your preservation into a local tourist attraction and party: Frozen Dead Guy Days.

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  46. The Cryonics Institute Offers a Chance at Immortal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you freeze someone after they've died all you have is a well-preserved corpse, not a chance for immortality.

  47. Frozen Snakeoil by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

    Please people, I mean... really. We've heard this crap before, we know it doesn't work. So, just stop. Really. These people are snakeoil salesmen, parasites. Yeeesh.

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  48. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A million Neanderthals would make a really good workforce for the coming oil drilling and mineral excavation jobs at the Artic Ocean.

  49. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by nbauman · · Score: 1

    Still, they've got a clever answer: given infinite time, we can solve that problem.

    Conveniently, they won't be around in infinite to be accountable if it doesn't work.

  50. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  51. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  52. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    That's always been the argument that's put me off cryonics. If you were to say, have a heart attack and faint, would 5 minutes still apply? Does that 5 minutes apply as soon as breathing stops basically?

    Have people been resuscitated after say, 30 mins or even an hour, and managed to have their brain functions relatively intact?

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  53. Mistakes Were Made by Jhyrryl · · Score: 1

    This American Life did a piece on how horribly bad things went in the early days of cryogenics. The episode was called Mistakes Were Made.

    --
    Jhyrryl
  54. Death and Taxes by lazy+genes · · Score: 0

    We will someday live long enough to acquire the wisdom to understand that taxes are a symptom of living unsustainably.

  55. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

    Wow a million neanderthals that want to do work in exchange for money? How is this different than 7 billion homo sapiens wanting the same thing?

    A million neanderthals would be a drop in the bucket. If all were reanimated in the US, our population would go up by 0.3%, and the world's would go up by 0.014%

  56. Good luck with that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We can barely keep buildings and bridges from crumbling in a few centuries and they are made from solid stone.

  57. Scan me up Scotty. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Hmm, I'd rather not be the frozen corpse they try to resurrect for grins long after sentient immortality is achieved, instead just scan me in and utilize me as a blueprint now.

    I mean, I'm a hacker and researcher of cybernetics and neuroscience, so folks like me would be the best canditades since we could help you wake us up from the inside if we catch a glimmer of awareness. That is: We could escape the "Chinese Box" if we found ourselves in it. I've got so many things to do, but not enough life-span to do it all, and being digitized means we could over-come that glacial 20Hz organic brain cycle limit... Digitize me, bro. What could possibly go wrong?
    Mua haha ha Ha!

  58. Modern cryogenics... by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the freezing process done by modern cryogenics still destroy the body quite considerably? I was under the impression the idea of reviving you would not only be curing your initial reason for death but also repairing all the damage the ice crystals that formed caused to your body, which would almost mean giving you a whole new body.

    Will we ever reach a position medically where that much damage can be repaired?

  59. Interesting.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of hauling VHS tapes to get them transferred to DVD, we'll be hauling the corpses of our loved ones to get their consciousness digitized.

  60. Video? by tsa · · Score: 1

    I clicked on all the links but I didn't find the bloody video. Where is it?

    --

    -- Cheers!

  61. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have people been resuscitated after say, 30 mins or even an hour, and managed to have their brain functions relatively intact?

    Yes. Those are usually cases of people losing consciousness in very cold environments. Drowning in a cold lake, for example. It's nothing to bet on, but sometimes people are revived with no ill effects in cases like that, even if they've been gone longer than is usually viable.

  62. Why do you assume that revival is biological? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It amazes me when everybody assumes that cryogenics is about reviving the body in its prior state. That is the most unlikely situation and in some cases of terminally ill patients, not even desirable. The only sensible thing is to extract the information that makes you what you are. This information is contained in the structure of your brain tissue (more specifically the synaptic topology) and possibly some additional chemicals. And even that does not have to be preserved with 100% fidelity, since neural networks are quite resilient against damage. The only big question is how well the cryopreservation process actually works. If it can save 90% of that information, that is OK. With enough neuroscientific knowledge in the future ( in 100 years we are sure to know how the brain works in its entirety) some of the areas can even be reconstructed. So in order for the whole thing to work today we simply need a non-destructive method for cryopreservation. Usually the water crystals form durign thawing, so yes, this is actually the single best option of achieving immortality. There is only one little problem, namely if there is going to be an existing technological civilization in 100 years.

  63. No! by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    No I don't. The quest for immortality has been around for thousands of years. Kings build pyramids for it. Alchemists sought after it. Exploration of the New World was often fueled by the quest for the fountain of youth. In the end all those people died. As will I, and as will you. Accepting your mortality is part of growing up. Shedding your fear of death enables you to really live! You can spend your entire life in fear of that moment and scheming for ways to avoid it, or you can embrace it and laugh in Death's face when he finally gets you. Either way you're going to end up in the same place in the end. Yes, even if you freeze yourself (And I can make that statement with near-absolute certainty that it is correct, much as I can state with near absolute certainty that any reader of this post will never win a lottery jackpot.)

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      death is more certain than not winning the lottery. not a very good way to wrap up an otherwise thoughtful statement. There hasn't been a single person yet who has avoided death, but there are many who have won a lottery, and some of those may read slashdot.

    2. Re:No! by Simploid · · Score: 1

      There hasn't been a single person yet who has avoided death, but there are many who have won a lottery, and some of those may read slashdot..

      I think I know what you are saying but apart from some claims about people who had a very long life and are still living after over a thousand years in some religious traditions, every living person has avoided death.

    3. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a little more science behind this than the pyramids. And yeah, it's great that you're in touch with your own mortality, but wanting more life isn't the same as fearing death. No-one is recommending spending your entire life in fear, scheming for ways to avoid death. This is just a gamble where you lose a bit of money, but could win an extra life in the distant future.

      Your certainty about death based on historical precedent is silly. The quest for flight has been around for thousands of years. The quest to turn lead into gold has been around for thousands of years. The quest to create a walking automaton has been around for thousands of years (i.e. golems). Now we have aircraft and particle accelerators and robots. So please, don't get all smug about how brave you are - your lack of imagination is nothing to be proud of.

    4. Re:No! by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      Hey! The pyramids were CUTTING EDGE technology for the time! You know how much money it would cost to build a pyramid today? 5 BILLION DOLLARS!

      I heard a story on NPR a year or two ago about some cryonics institute, they didn't even last 30 years before they ran out of money. Maybe they should have had 5 BILLION DOLLARS! They certainly lasted "just a few" thousand years less than a pyramid, and didn't even leave a well-preserved mummy behind for future archaeologists! The relatives were presumably bent out of shape because they'd made a bet on this and lost (Or maybe because they'd have preferred to inherit the $20000, I wasn't clear on that point.) Unless I actually see them resurrect a frozen dead guy, I'm giving them less credibility someone peddling a pyramid.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone read about TA65 (Telemarase Activation) that supposedly can make you younger ? There are a couple of books out and lots of testimonials that it's a miracle cure. There seems to be a lot of science behind it if not much in the way of actual clinical studies.

  64. Re:Permanent brain damage & unbudgeted revival by quax · · Score: 1

    The five minute meme is a common misconception.

    From the linked article:

    "Contrary to common perception, brain and other cells in the body can live for many hours after a person dies. There are different estimates on how long cells can survive without a blood supply and oxygen after death: bone cells for four days, skin cells for 24 hours. Although the oxygen and energy supply to brain cells is depleted within four to five minutes, brain cells remain viable but non-functioning for up to eight hours."

  65. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can't even do it with animals (reviving) and they know it is not because we lack technology of resuscitation but their cryogenics is so crude that significant damage happens to the tissue, especially brain, during the freezing. So you pay to be a piece of meat stored nicely - while already having bad freezer burn, filling someones pockets.
    Amazing business model.

  66. Look up "Mammalian Diving Reflex" by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have people been resuscitated after say, 30 mins or even an hour, and managed to have their brain functions relatively intact?

    Absolutely. Look up "Mammalian Diving Reflex".

    Brain damage from short-term clinical death happens primarily after revival. The valves routing blood to the parts of the brain that need it stick in the state they were in when the oxygen finally failed.

    Muscles contract with stored energy and require metabolism to relax. "Valve off" is contracted, so when blood flow and oxygen is restored, the valves for regions of the brain that were turned down don't get oxygen and can't reopen - and without the blood flow they can't get oxygen, in a viscous circle. Raising the blood pressure to try to force them just blows the vessels, causing a stroke. The
    nerves die over a half hour to an hour (and kill each other off through glutamate cascade, as dying nerves release glutamate that causes others to fire, deplete their remaining energy reserves, and die in turn.

    Mammals, though, have a reflex related to deep diving. When diving deep, the increased pressure increases the partial pressure of oxygen, keeping things running until most of the oxygen is used up. Then coming back back up lowers the pressure further and can leaver the brain oxygen starved for long enough to produce the "valves stuck" phenomenon. To prevent this, mammals have the following reflex: When oxygen is running out AND the body (I think it's the back of the neck) is cold, the valves all open up, so any that get stuck are in the open position. Once oxygen is restored the blood flows, the nerves survive, the muscle gets repowered, and all is well - if thing hadn't been shut down long enough that too many cells died meanwhile.

    This was discovered when some victims of drowning in cold water recovered just fine, with no brain damage, after half an hour or more of clinical death. I think the time before damage sets in is something between 25 and 45 minutes.

    I don't know how CI's current protocols work. But ALCOR's are designed to include activating the diving reflex, if possible, so the brain's valves stick in the open position.

    (This is more to encourage better perfusion of cryoprotectants than to try to make the brain restartable: As of the last time I looked the thought was that brains preserved - even by the best techniques available at the time - would require rebuilding by nanotechnology, so the idea was to preserve as much as possible of whatever might encode memory and personality.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Look up "Mammalian Diving Reflex" by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

      When oxygen is running out AND the body (I think it's the back of the neck) is cold,

      Face is cold. (Specifically, regions innervated by the Trigeminal nerve.) No other region triggers the reflex.

      (It does other things besides the valve thing, too.)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    2. Re:Look up "Mammalian Diving Reflex" by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      In light of what you've said, can you summarize what that would typically mean for someone wanting to try this Cryonics thing out? Given an average/typical death, is there a chance my brain would retain much of its function if I was frozen in the timespan that the Cryonics institute would support (say under 30 minutes) ?

      Assume technology of the future can overcome all other medical hurdles, and the only problem is the brain's 'data' being kept.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  67. Mush by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    How many times must people be told, when the cells are frozen, they are destroyed by ice crystals. Ask any chef (Ramsey says it constantly and can tell by taste).

    It's a scam.

  68. pure shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this shit gets posted every so often. as far as i have read, they still haven't figured out what to do with the ice crystal that form in the brain destroying the tissue. sure, your body's intact. but no brain equals dead, to me anyway.

  69. surprised by .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'm quite surprised by all the hate about this on here. though i suppose, i really shouldn't be, at this point, not after lurking here for the past few months.

    for those saying that our allotted time is enough or what's the point if all our friends and family are long dead, well, then it's obviously not for you but f^^^k off and let those who want to, do so.

    for those questioning why a future society would spend time or effort on reviving those frozen in cryo:
    it's entirely possible that they wouldn't devote any resources to do so. they might also have advanced enough that revival is possible simply as a side-benefit.
    on the other hand, it's entirely possible that humanity by then has grown passed the pure douche-buggery so rampant today (and yes i'm especially looking at you f888ks on slashdot and reddit) and they'd do it simply because it's a decent thing to do.

    i'm quite hopeful that sometime in the far far future humanity will have move passed scarcity economics and AI's will have advanced enough that they'd be able to keep us from being such colossal f444ks to each other and help us advance overcome our shortcomings.

  70. Just what we all need by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    A bunch of Walt Disney wannabes. It still amazes me that people actually believe that this kind of technology holds any promise unless your trying to create zombie armies of the undead.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  71. I Think Cryonics Are So Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just thinking about Cryonics, and how cool it will be to have a Kelvinator for a coffin gives me the shivers and sends chills down my spine!
    (And I'm not gonna mind if this comment rates only an absolute zero)

  72. Wait, what? Who? by bmo · · Score: 1

    "David Ettinger, today's interviewee, is both the son of CI founder Robert Ettinger and CI's lawyer. "

    http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/354/mistakes-were-made?act=1#play

    The various incarnatins of the (now) CI has a /spotless/ history, don't it?

    This is "We need more money for a process we know doesn't work. But trust us anyway."

    --
    BMO

  73. What makes these poeple think... by aklinux · · Score: 1

    ...that anyone a hundred years or so from now would bother awakening them. Probably just use their carcasses for fertilizer. Unless, of course, they need some exhibits for the zoo.

  74. Mummification for the gullible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is just an alternative mummification process exploiting the gullible.

  75. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by tragedy · · Score: 1

    How do we know that "once society has advanced enough," they won't simply decide that the geezercicles aren't worth the time or energy?

    We don't know that. Most people probably wouldn't want to be revived into such a cold world anyway... Of course, the world we currently live in is probably that cold as it is right now. Replace "frozen people" with desperate living refugees on ships and we have pretty much the same situation.

  76. What about freezing terminal patients before death by Zoide · · Score: 1

    Most of the comments here assume that you would only freeze someone who has already died. What about freezing terminally ill patients in the hopes of thawing them when the cure for their disease (eg. pancreatic cancer) has been found? That way we don't have to worry about getting the corpse to the freezer within five minutes of the time of death, etc. It would also simplify revival because you're not starting with a body that was already so messed up that it died naturally.

  77. st:tng by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't Data already state that cryonics was only a fad and didn't survive past the 2040's? If true then nothing to see here. I believe the episode was called "Relics".

  78. How about your soul in heaven or hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens with your soul when you are revived after millenia? Will it be torn back from it's blissful times in heaven? Or from tormenting eternity in hell?

  79. Regular advertisement by aepervius · · Score: 1

    I see advertisement for this "opportunity" every few years or so. Have they even demonstrated that they can freeze the brain without the usual ice build up ?

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  80. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

    Not if they found a million Neanderthals, all of whom would want jobs and a place to live.

    I know it's not clever to accept a zero hours contract with no sick and no holiday, but calling them Neanderthals is a bit mean.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  81. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

    forgot this ---> /
    where's edit when you need it bah.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  82. Re:Would they care to revive you even if they can? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ugg no work low wage job. Ugg want office job.

  83. Corpsicles for future aliens to snack on ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Corpsicles for future aliens to snack on ...

    Or post apocalyptic cannibals (though why should the power stay on thru that -- just rotted slime in a defunct freezer...)

  84. Cryonic BullShite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It only takes one semester of undergraduate quantum mechanics to learn about tunneling and zero point energy to punch all the holes necessary to let the hot air out of this balloon. This is just another high tech scam suckering the ignorant out of their hard earned ducats, as if the 401K wasn't enough of one.

    Even if it worked would we really want to let the Hitler's, Stalin's, Mao's, Nixon's and Bush's of the world a second chance? Death is not only a certainty it is also good idea.

  85. Getting frozen is the second worst thing by gregor-e · · Score: 1

    So what you're saying is you'd prefer the certainty of information theoretic death that comes from burial or cremation over the as yet unproven, long-shot possibility that, having reduced further decay to practically zero, science will eventually be able to repair whatever killed you plus the freezer damage? That's quite a nihilistic preference you've got going.

  86. Re:What about freezing terminal patients before de by Desler · · Score: 1

    Would be illegal in the Us. You have to be declared legally dead before you can be cryogenically frozen.

  87. Freezing no longer used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vitrification is used

  88. The 1970's would like their scam back. by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

    This isn't new, and unfortunately it isn't science either. Fact of the matter is brain death is brain death, total and absolute degenerative collapse of the nervous system. Whether it's whole body cryogenics, or the low cost "head" only operation, the only thing that cryonics can promise you is that some day someone may take out your frozen remains and make a clone of them. And that's of course assuming the company actually remains afloat and doesn't go belly up as at least one cryonics company did, leaving thier "clients" high and ... rather warmed over. It might even look like you. But it won't be you, it won't have your memories, and probably not even your personality. Nothing has changed since the decades this came out to make it any less pseudoscience than it was back then.