I see a lot of posts on here about extending humans lifespans. Some about extending them indefinitely. But pretty much every post seems to be a fantasy post by someone who wants to live longer and doesn’t consider the implications of an aging society. For example, what happens to social security ? What happens to housing costs and space. Would younger generations be more and more disadvantaged because they have to compete against a larger share of folks who have a head start. How will the environment deal with more folks? Simply put, living longer, or forever, would create many many problems that should at least be considered.

These secondary problems are vastly more interesting to me than the simplistic take I see here. Has anyone seen any studies that true delve into the challenges?

Donald Trump, Taylor Swift, the pope. I imagine that it could happen through the guise of a vaccine or something. What do you think?

Reddit is a public company now and it feels like management has propped up so much AI potential with Reddit.

Does that mean all posts and comments are essentially training the LLMs and AI of the future?

For me, if it were possible to live a long time, and I am not referring to thousands of years in the distant future, but to a relatively near future in which individuals can reach 140 years, for example. There should also be the possibility that those who do not want to live that long can have some kind of assisted death, etc.

Because, as is currently the case, some lives are prolonged as a kind of "obligation" and many means are used to continue a life even if one does not want to, and if that happens for thirty or forty years it would be a difficulty.

Would it have to happen right at the moment of natural death?

If cell cultivated meat becomes economic and takes over the market from animal meat, what will happen in western USA rural areas where the main agricultural activity is cattle ranching?

Is it a bad idea to buy a home in a rural cattle ranching area?

I had a friend who was a philosopher who believed we are determined for over 10 years and felt super relieved once he shook of that thought because the thought of not having a free will made him uncomfortable.

As a programmer I also believe in determinism. I can't see the universe and evolution functioning without determinism. Imagine science without determinism.´I couldn't imagine a stable universe that's not deterministic. To me a non deterministic system probably ends up chaotic.

Some people might think that suggests there is no free will if you're determined.

But to me this happens on a different level.

If you imagine space time as an abstract multidimensional model you will see patterns emerge everywhere. Look at how nature expresses patterns. That's because there exist physical laws which are basically the scaffold for the deterministic system we live in.

To me free will is something that neccesarily emerges out of intelligence, awareness and consciousness.

It just allows you to observe and interact with your environment by means of intelligent reasoning. It's similar to self modifying code where a dynamic system alters itself.

You might argue that the process of intelligent reasoning (thinking) is deterministic and thus you can not have a free will, but that's exactly where free will emerges from. It's an intrinsic high dimensional pattern that arises out of intelligent reasoning.

Much like a whirl in a draining bathtub is an intrinsic pattern that emerges in a flow of physical matter so is free will a whirl / pattern that emerges from the flow of information within the brain.

If you would simplify dynamic spacetime and imagine it as static 4 dimensional object which can be described by a formula with certain parameters then the phenomenon of free will would influence the shape of the four dimensional object. If given the same initial parameters the formula would always resolve to the same four dimensional object.

I think once we solved intelligence we will be able to study how it gives rise to consciosness and eventually describe intelligence, consciousness and free will mathematically.

what's coming next in the space of 5 years?

Digital world

This thought came to me while answering someone’s question here. I know we have already digitized credit/debit card. why not everything else? No more digging through piles of papers—just tap and go! Imagine the freedom of carrying your vital documents like passports and health cards on your phone—no more rummaging through piles of papers, just a simple tap away. It's like having a digital vault of your life in your pocket, ready for any adventure anytime. Like spontaneous trips . Plus, it's not just about convenience; it's a step toward simplifying our lives and embracing the digital age.

Edit: Thank you all for your kind contributions. I’m currently unwell and don’t tend to post due the huge anxiety of what people might say. I feel the right conversations now, in these AI communities, could help influence our future.

Will AI and the automation of armies eventually lead to a stalemate like in ‘War games’, with the realisation being that war is a waste of resources?

Would we ultimately end up with war being obsolete?

Obviously, there are many factors here, like access to tech, resourcing, etc. so assume that this there are two warring countries who both have fully replaced their armies with AI replacements and both sides are reasonably matched.

Edit: Assume a benevolent AI, it kinda gets boring when every conversation assumes the end of humanity.

Edit: I’m imagining that this progression takes time, and that reliance on and the reliability of AI is almost 100%

Im fascinated by the fast-approaching human depopulation, and am among those who are optimistic about the potential impact on all living creatures. I get the great risk due to aging populations, yet feel that this one aspect gets nearly all the attention. Beyond the obvious relief to all non-humans on our warming planet, why is there seemingly no discussion on benefits like excess housing, infrastructure (transportation, energy, water, etc), and prime erable land? Is it just me, or are we only assessing a few important potential ramifications?

Edit: misspelled arable