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