Any “technology” which claims miraculous benefits on a timescale longer than it takes to achieve tenure and retire is vaporware, and should not be taken seriously.
I’m curious. Were you agreeing with the quote (and thus dissing cryonics), disagreeing with the quote (and bringing cryonics as a counterexample), or genuinely without agenda?
-- Scott Locklin
Cryonics?
I’m curious. Were you agreeing with the quote (and thus dissing cryonics), disagreeing with the quote (and bringing cryonics as a counterexample), or genuinely without agenda?
Partly that second one, partly just curious if it was an intended subject.
The original context is that Scott Locklin is a nanotechnology skeptic.
Follow the link, he explains it there.
Manifestly stupid.