5 ms·

Who cares if you're 10x, we'll all be 10x dead at some point. In 50-100 years I doubt most of your 10x work will still be around. Might as well go enjoy some li

Who cares if you're 10x, we'll all be 10x dead at some point. In 50-100 years I doubt most of your 10x work will still be around. Might as well go enjoy some life before it ends.

socceroos 12y ago
^ this guy gets it. Life is short, do your best at your profession but keep everything in perspective - do what you love!
M8 12y ago
GitHub and BitBucket are going to delete sources after a period of time? Could you please point me to that licence agreement paragraph? Are museums going to throw away paintings in 50-100 years as well?
- supercoder 12y ago
  What's to suggest the majority of peoples work is stored on github or bitbucket ?
forloop 12y ago
1) This sounds like rationalisation. Clearly there's advantages to being 10x at something valuable. 2) The premise of the 10xers not being around in 50-100 years could be correct. It depends on the amount of money invested in anti-ageing technology. Coming down on one side or another, in a binary fashion: I think your comment is false.
- shawn-furyan 12y ago
  2) Well, given the associated uncertainty, that's not strictly true. The relationship between money spent on aging research and lifespan extension could converge on a marginally higher average lifespan rather than growing infinitely long with infinitely increasing expenditure. Until better than marginal gains are realized, I would say it's premature to hold massive lifespan lengthening out as a realistic possibility since we don't know what road blocks lie ahead. Sure, it's possible in the 'anything is possible' sense, but, IMO, not as a practical consideration.
  - forloop 12y ago
    Say a 10xer is 30, and the average lifespan is 80 years. If ageing could be halved, then the remaining 50-year-left-pre-intervention results in 100 years of life. But has there already be any substance which has doubled lifespan? Yes[0]! In rats. Humans aren't rats; but it's a clue to what's possible in mammals (verses C. elegans, or yeast). > Until better than marginal gains are realized, I would say it's premature to hold massive lifespan lengthening out as a realistic possibility since we don't know what road blocks lie ahead. Sure, it's possible in the 'anything is possible' sense, but, IMO, not as a practical consideration. People are working on the problem of radical live extension today. So even if you consider it impractical, that's certainly not a view held by everyone. Plus, a gradual improvement is all that's needed. As long as someone can live long enough to reach longevity escape velocity[1], that's the problem solved! [0] http://www.kurzweilai.net/fullerene-c60-administration-doubles-rat-lifespan-with-no-toxicity http://www.kurzweilai.net/fullerene-c60-administration-doubl... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_escape_velocity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_escape_velocity

Who cares if you're 10x, we'll all be 10x dead at some point. In 50-100 years I doubt most of your 10x work will still be around. Might as well go enjoy some life before it ends.

socceroos 12y ago

^ this guy gets it. Life is short, do your best at your profession but keep everything in perspective - do what you love!

M8 12y ago

GitHub and BitBucket are going to delete sources after a period of time? Could you please point me to that licence agreement paragraph? Are museums going to throw away paintings in 50-100 years as well?

supercoder 12y ago
What's to suggest the majority of peoples work is stored on github or bitbucket ?

forloop 12y ago

1) This sounds like rationalisation. Clearly there's advantages to being 10x at something valuable. 2) The premise of the 10xers not being around in 50-100 years could be correct. It depends on the amount of money invested in anti-ageing technology. Coming down on one side or another, in a binary fashion: I think your comment is false.

shawn-furyan 12y ago
2) Well, given the associated uncertainty, that's not strictly true. The relationship between money spent on aging research and lifespan extension could converge on a marginally higher average lifespan rather than growing infinitely long with infinitely increasing expenditure. Until better than marginal gains are realized, I would say it's premature to hold massive lifespan lengthening out as a realistic possibility since we don't know what road blocks lie ahead. Sure, it's possible in the 'anything is possible' sense, but, IMO, not as a practical consideration.
- forloop 12y ago
  Say a 10xer is 30, and the average lifespan is 80 years. If ageing could be halved, then the remaining 50-year-left-pre-intervention results in 100 years of life. But has there already be any substance which has doubled lifespan? Yes[0]! In rats. Humans aren't rats; but it's a clue to what's possible in mammals (verses C. elegans, or yeast). > Until better than marginal gains are realized, I would say it's premature to hold massive lifespan lengthening out as a realistic possibility since we don't know what road blocks lie ahead. Sure, it's possible in the 'anything is possible' sense, but, IMO, not as a practical consideration. People are working on the problem of radical live extension today. So even if you consider it impractical, that's certainly not a view held by everyone. Plus, a gradual improvement is all that's needed. As long as someone can live long enough to reach longevity escape velocity[1], that's the problem solved! [0] http://www.kurzweilai.net/fullerene-c60-administration-doubles-rat-lifespan-with-no-toxicity http://www.kurzweilai.net/fullerene-c60-administration-doubl... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_escape_velocity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_escape_velocity