Some notes on Kriorus.
It allows “sign up after death”: that is, a relative may try to sign up for an already deceased person. Many people were cryopreserved this way when their relatives started googling after the death of a person (or a pet).
Last year Kriorus had internal conflict but the attempt to change management seems to fail.
My concern is that fusing experiences may lead to loss of individuality. We could fuse all minds into one simple eternal bliss but its is nit far from death.
One solution is fuse which is not destroying personal identity. Here I assume that “personal identity” is a set of observer-moments which mutually recognise each other a same person.
Also, narrow AI may be used for production of dangerous weapons, e.g. quick generation of the code of a biological virus which will be be able exterminate humanity.
A few other narratives:
If reactor grade plutonium could be used to make nuclear weapons, there is enough material in the world to make million nukes and it is dispersed through many actors.
Only arctic methane eruption matters, as it could trigger runaway global warming.
Only Peak oil matters, and in next 10 years we will see shortages of it and other raw materials.
Only coronavirus mutations matters, as they could become more deadly.
Only reports about UFO matters, as they imply that our world model is significantly wrong.
And it could be made via some modifications of E.Coli or other simple bacteria, like adding ability to fix nitrogen. It almost happened already during Azolla event.
A strong argument for brain-only preservation is that by law (in Russia) only skeleton is a body, and the brain is only a tissue sample, so less possible problems if police asks about legal basis. I did brain-only preservation for my mother, and they returned the upper part of the skull back, and she looked as if nothing happened and she had full christian service in open casket with many people attending – and nobody knows that she is cryopreserved and a possible conflict was avoided.
Ireland also exploded. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/
I would watch NY and CA.
In some states the spread of the British variant will be obvious earlier, and it could be observed as double peak on charts.
The situation in the UK could be also informative. There are 57K cases today in UK.
That is true for therapies which work on damage (SENS). But if we see aging as a process which creates the damages, than it is reasonable to stop it on early age.
Also, I’ve seen a recent article “Longevity‐related molecular pathways are subject to midlife “switch” in humans” which implies that many interventions should happen early in life.
Thanks for great post!
It is safe enough to be sold OTC, and there are some research which connects with life extension effects. The real problem is that we don’t have human tests of its effects on longevity, despite its widespread use. The first study like this will be TAME, which will explore life extension properties of metformin. There are several reasons why such studies are difficult to perform. Firstly, they are costly, but known safe things are non-patentable. Secondly, they need to be very long., and long human studies are especially costly.
Unfortunately, it seems that most intervention works before aging actually developed, so we need to give them to younger people, at least before 50.
There is an article which covers similar topics, but only abstract is available:
There is a problem with most anti-aging interventions: long expected duration of human trials, as results and lack of side effects will be obvious only decades after the start oа such trials. Without trials, FDA will never approve such therapies.
However, there is a way to increase the speed of trials using biomarkers of aging—or testing of already known to be safe interventions, like vitamin D. But biomarkers need to be calibrated and safe interventions provide only small effects on aging. Thus, it looks like some way to accelerate trials is needed if we want radical solution to aging to 2030. What could it be?
Glitch in the Matrix: Urban Legend or Evidence of the Simulation? The article is here: https://philpapers.org/rec/TURGIT
In the last decade, an urban legend about “glitches in the matrix” has become popular. As it is typical for urban legends, there is no evidence for most such stories, and the phenomenon could be explained as resulting from hoaxes, creepypasta, coincidence, and different forms of cognitive bias. In addition, the folk understanding of probability does not bear much resemblance to actual probability distributions, resulting in the illusion of improbable events, like the “birthday paradox”. Moreover, many such stories, even if they were true, could not be considered evidence of glitches in a linear-time computer simulation, as the reported “glitches” often assume non-linearity of time and space—like premonitions or changes to the past. Different types of simulations assume different types of glitches; for example, dreams are often very glitchy. Here, we explore the theoretical conditions necessary for such glitches to occur and then create a typology of so-called “GITM” reports. One interesting hypothetical subtype is “viruses in the matrix”, that is, self-replicating units which consume computational resources in a manner similar to transposons in the genome, biological and computer viruses, and memes.
But for the flu virus reassortment (more correct word here) is happening from time to time, when two viruses infect the same cell and exchange genes.
I have seem claims that origin of coronavirus could be explained via recombination, but I would like to learn more about it.
In South Africa infections grew almost 10 times in a month. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-africa/
There is also quick growth in Czech republic and Netherlands. It looks like new strains are already there. Also, what worry me, is what happen when these new strains from different places recombines.
It looks like that not only the share of infections by new virus, but the total number of infection is also rising. UK had record 35k infections yesterday. Netherlands has a spike of infections from 5k to 14k during December. Thus even if this virus is not deadly per se, it will put more pressure on the medical system and will turn deadlier at the end.
If we run two non-communicating copies of the same AI, could it be helpful in detecting failures?
Philpaper archive sends recommendations of similar articles.