49 replies to this topic

[suspire]

Bill Gates talks briefly about Moore's Law and Singularity and his doubts about the likelihood of it occuring anytime soon. He also mentions in passing his desire to be around for a long time to come:

http://news.bbc.co.u...nb&mp=wm&news=1

[Aegist]

The link didn't seem to work (403 BBC Error page) and I cant find the article...

[suspire]

You can find it here:
http://news.bbc.co.u...ine/default.stm

It's the video entitled "Gates' Vision For Education".

[curious_sle]

Well, i can put up with Microsoft and Bill Gates if he is the one coughing up da money to develop quick working life extension for all. I don't know... he talks to Ray Kurzweil and stuff and what not and still the Gates foundation doesn't pay so much as a penny in the MPrize etc? I mean, even i did manage to donate some. I think hard one becoming one of the three hundred (just got a new incentive to join this year :-) dinner at SENS3? Whoohoo! I was thinking on suggesting something along those lines but glad to see it!)... so Bill gates with an equal commitment would cough up millions! Ah well. let's hope.

Thanks for posting (even though this guy gives me ulcer every time i hear him speak :( )

[suspire]

Well, the Gates Foundation seems more oriented towards education, poverty alleviation, etc. When you consider that somewhere between 1 to 3 billion, yes, billion people live in poverty(depending on which standard you use--the 1 dollar a day or the 2 dollar a day), and that in honesty, those numbers are underestimated due to political reasons(for instance, the Indian government vastly underestimates the amount of its poor in order to present a more "powerful" image on the world stage), I think an organization like the Gates Foundation not donating to projects like life extension isn't out of the ordinary or wrong. I'd actually be more bothered by the idea of them doing so, truth be told, when there are so many other more pressing issues facing the world.

That said, if Gates donated money himself to stuff like the MPrize, it'd be fine as an individual. You have to remember, however, that people like Bill Gates get petitions like mad for money and causes. I recall reading that some lottery prize winners got on the average of 50,000 pieces of mail within the first month or two of them winning the lottery...from people wanting money from them. Hard to pick and choose what pet projects and items one wants to donate money to. I'd be really surprised, however, if you told me Gates didn't donate substantial money to various medical research organizations and the like--I'm sure he supports that sort of thing. He may just not be big on specific research on longevity.

[advancedatheist]

When you consider that somewhere between 1 to 3 billion, yes, billion people live in poverty(depending on which standard you use--the 1 dollar a day or the 2 dollar a day),

A couple bucks a day? We should celebrate these people for "living lightly upon the earth"!

[curious_sle]

suspire: i was strictly relating to the life-extension business which is the (unless i missed something) main aspect of this site. I can relate to the poverty stuff. very well. I lived in Bolivia a while and it doesn't get much poorer then that. To wait with life-extension till everyone is well fed, well educated and capable of self sustaining and intelligent choice will only result on it never being realized since as unfortunate as it is there will probably never really be a world much different.

[suspire]

No, I didn't mean to say we should wait until the end of global poverty for life extension research(though I do disagree with you--I think conditions can improve for many, but it takes a lot of will and effort to make those changes by a lot of people probably unwilling to do what is necessary to help change conditions for others). Rather, I was saying I don't think organizations like the Gates Foundation, which is dedicated towards poverty reduction and the like, should donate--it seems to go against their mandate.

I think private citizens and non-profits that are scientifically inclined, should donate. I also think it'd be a small thing for the U.S. government to earmark 100 million a year to such research--considering all the outrageous earmarks the government passes on a regular basis. I'm fine with that--as long as we keep things in proportion.

[curious_sle]

Hm, i did write Gates Foundation and not Gates eh? Ah well. Which moneypot of that person the money actually comes from i don't really care but technicaly speaking you are probably right (not having the charter in front of me etc).

Oh and of course conditions could change for many. They always could. They don't do much on average however. Given sufficient time it'll change granted but it is glacial and all people so far into things like 3rd world development and aid etc were useless and helpless disoriented people or worse only were into it for their own good. Nah.

[JonesGuy]

Reducing 3rd world poverty will do a fantastic amount for the Cure for Aging. Primarily, it will boost the economy thus providing more general funding/resources for science. Secondly, it will create customers for a Cure for Aging that currently don't exist.

[Zarrka]

or will create people who have managed to live through extreem circumstances now wanting to live forever now their hardship is minimised.

the more people interested = the greater push for it = the faster it can happen.

If there is money being used for this purpose, lets just hope the are using it wisely.

[lunarsolarpower]

Reducing 3rd world poverty will do a fantastic amount for the Cure for Aging.

Prosperous advanced societies have extremely low and diminishing birthrates. Thus they have a strong incentive to prolong the vital healthspan of their citizens.

I just saw this book at the library a couple days ago:

[advancedatheist]

This seems to suggest that high birth rates, by increasing the number of taxable producers, fuel the growth of the state; while low birth rates over the long run tend to starve the state of resources.

I just saw this book at the library a couple days ago:

[JonesGuy]

Yeah, it does miss out in suggesting that deflation is probably going to be the key needed to pay for the Baby Boomer's retirement. I'm hoping we can survive the stress while trying to get them all cured of aging.

Then it's back to work for them!

[lunarsolarpower]

This seems to suggest that high birth rates, by increasing the number of taxable producers, fuel the growth of the state; while low birth rates over the long run tend to starve the state of resources.

If anything, the author is someone who doesn't have the greatest track record at predictions. Inside the book he talks about his predictions several decades ago of world-wide famines far before the present.

[forever freedom]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

[Shepard]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Dude, come on.

[suspire]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Yeah, I know! What jerks! I mean, jeez, what could they be thinking?! But you can make up for it, sam: just donate all your earnings for the rest of your life to curing aging! No time for "pain-killer" methodology, you know, those creature comforts like a hot meal, a roof over your head and basic healthcare. Surely that's immaterial in the face of the greater good as you've advocated in a prior thread! So come on, buddy, we're counting on you! And who knows, maybe you'll get a few of Bill Gates's bucks once you're among the impoverished--and that way, you could donate his money(the money you received from his charitable efforts) to curing aging, too!

[Agarikon]

When I become a billionaire...

[Shannon Vyff]

suspire --thanks! glad to have you around

[caston]

Are donations to the various life extension efforts tax deductable?

[suspire]

If it is registered as a public charity under the Internal Revenue Code Section 501 © (3). And these days, almost anything can be registered as such; it has gotten pretty ridiculous. For instance, according to the NY Times, "even an organization established after Hurricane Katrina to help practitioners of sadomasochism obtain gear they had lost in the storm" qualified for a tax deducation. Lets all light a candle for the New Orleans S&M community; I don't know how they go on living without their whips and ballgags. (full article here: http://www.nytimes.c...prod=permalink)

That's why people need to do some real investigating, when donating, to make sure their dollars actually go to the charities/causes they want to support.

[Shannon Vyff]

Yes, Mprize is a deduction too

[forever freedom]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Dude, come on.

What? I'm dead serious.

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Yeah, I know! What jerks! I mean, jeez, what could they be thinking?! But you can make up for it, sam: just donate all your earnings for the rest of your life to curing aging! No time for "pain-killer" methodology, you know, those creature comforts like a hot meal, a roof over your head and basic healthcare. Surely that's immaterial in the face of the greater good as you've advocated in a prior thread! So come on, buddy, we're counting on you! And who knows, maybe you'll get a few of Bill Gates's bucks once you're among the impoverished--and that way, you could donate his money(the money you received from his charitable efforts) to curing aging, too!

Do you think that bill and warren donate everything they have? Of course not. Neither would I, that's never what i said. But if i get rich i will definitely donate a lot of money to life extension researches instead of donating to charity, you can count on that.

The reason? As i said in another thread;

I think this is short-term thinking and an instant pain reliever as i said before.

I think investing in technology is far more important than saving lives now. May seem cruel and too cold blooded, but in the long term many more lives are going to be saved by the technological advances created by billions of investment than by spending these billions in charity to save some lives now.

The problem is that people think this is a cold hearted approach, but i cant see a more logic approach than this one. Maybe thats the problem; its too logic for most people to understand and rationalize.

Edited by sam988, 13 September 2007 - 08:49 PM.

[Shepard]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Dude, come on.

What? I'm dead serious.

Getting upset at Bill Gates and Warren Buffett because they give their money to charities instead of life extension research is ridiculous. You (and I, in some cases) might think ithat ther money would be better spent elsewhere, but I'm not going to tell another man what to do with his money. Being wealthy is not a prerequisite to furthering life extension, anyway.

[Cyberbrain]

It's just so weird to me that Bill Gates, a guy who is so rich and so dedicated to humanity
and technology, doesn't donate anything to for the singularity, life extension, etc.

[forever freedom]

Ah screw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... they spend dozens and dozens of billions in charity and don't give even one single of these billions (not that i know of at least) to researches related to cure aging.

Bill and Warren definitely aren't on my "idol" list.

Dude, come on.

What? I'm dead serious.

Getting upset at Bill Gates and Warren Buffett because they give their money to charities instead of life extension research is ridiculous. You (and I, in some cases) might think ithat ther money would be better spent elsewhere, but I'm not going to tell another man what to do with his money. Being wealthy is not a prerequisite to furthering life extension, anyway.

Ahh so that's the case. I thought you were thinking that i didn't make sense on my logic of why it might be more important to invest in technology than in charity.


About having no reason for being upset, you're right. The "screw bill gates" that i said was supposed to be in a kind of fun way. But indeed i don't understand why don't they donate to technology; maybe it's because it doesn't make them look so good to the public eyes as when they donate to charity.

[suspire]

Do you think that bill and warren donate everything they have? Of course not. Neither would I, that's never what i said. But if i get rich i will definitely donate a lot of money to life extension researches instead of donating to charity, you can count on that.

Yes, I am quite aware you would, unfortunately. You missed the gist of what I was getting at--it's always people living comfortably in the Western world who make such statements, especially in the name of logic. Every niche cause, idea, movement, etc finds its position to be the most "logical" for society/humanity. My point was: If you're so dedicated to the cause, give up everything, see how it is to live in real poverty and then decide whether you'd still think it was a "pain killer" mindset to give to charity. Your statement is just the next step in a long and sordid line of flawed reasoning that has dominated societies in power when speaking about the rest of the world--pure self-interest disguised as "for the good of humanity".

So put your money where your mouth is: donate all your cash to life extension, then live in utter poverty for a few years and come back and tell us if you still find that the most "logical" decision is for those with wealth to turn their back on charity as "pain killer" ideology and simply donate to...life extension. You'd be giving to your "cause", which you've already said was *worth the lives of hundreds of millions of people*(by implication), so step up!

I think this is short-term thinking and an instant pain reliever as i said before.

I think investing in technology is far more important than saving lives now. May seem cruel and too cold blooded, but in the long term many more lives are going to be saved by the technological advances created by billions of investment than by spending these billions in charity to save some lives now.

The problem is that people think this is a cold hearted approach, but i cant see a more logic approach than this one. Maybe thats the problem; its too logic for most people to understand and rationalize.

Yes, I saw this grossly monstrous, not to mention arrogant(ooh, you're just sooooo much more "logical" than all of us, including Bill Gates and Warren Buffet--those guys are just so stupid and illogical!) statement before and that was what I was getting at in my prior jibe. This "logical" thinking is reminiscent of Pol Pot and Mao Zedong and their "logical" conclusions for their societies. While you are not advocating proactive genocide, your callous indifference is its philosophical next door neighbor.

Beyond this, you also seem to have no grasp of history--that simply turning your back on the poor--especially when you are talking about 1 to 2 billion people--may lead to the destruction of entire societies, revolutions, international terrorism, and socio-economic upheavals that will have global impact. The resulting chaos will have unpredictable results, many of which will probably have a detrimental impact on life-extension technology, at the least. While I know all those hundreds of millions of people are nameless and faceless to you and separated, in all probability by tons of land and water, and therefore you believe their plight does not impact nor endanger your safe, comfortable environment, in this technologically advanced world, it has become more, not less imperative that we make an effort to help humanity as a whole and not simply people with the luxury to enjoy life extension.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of why there are massive logic holes in your position. You need to really push yourself to see beyond your own four walls before you make such radically rash statements.

Edited by suspire, 14 September 2007 - 03:32 PM.

[Ghostrider]

It's just so weird to me that Bill Gates, a guy who is so rich and so dedicated to humanity
and technology, doesn't donate anything to for the singularity, life extension, etc.

He does not because, ironically, he also cares about his image. By investing in life extension, people would claim that he is only trying to save himself -- that he has a selfish motive instead of curing AIDS or malaria so that those people saved can die of starvation or old age, whatever happens first. Yeah, what needs to happen first is a paradigm shift on how the majority views aging. If people had a Manhattan Project or invested as much energy into aging as putting a man on the moon to fight communism, the problem would be largely solved by now.

[suspire]

It's just so weird to me that Bill Gates, a guy who is so rich and so dedicated to humanity
and technology, doesn't donate anything to for the singularity, life extension, etc.

He does not because, ironically, he also cares about his image. By investing in life extension, people would claim that he is only trying to save himself -- that he has a selfish motive instead of curing AIDS or malaria so that those people saved can die of starvation or old age, whatever happens first. Yeah, what needs to happen first is a paradigm shift on how the majority views aging. If people had a Manhattan Project or invested as much energy into aging as putting a man on the moon to fight communism, the problem would be largely solved by now.

I don't think Bill Gates is thinking about his public image. He isn't a politician, he is a businessman. As is Warren Buffet. As is many of the top folks donating to various charities. And I think their public image would be enormous if they were behind helping figure out a solution to aging. That said, most of these folks see a larger picture that have priority: global poverty, environmentalism, multiple major diseases, etc. Hell, if you agree with Stephen Hawking, the most important goal for humanity would be to colonize other planets in order to ensure the survival of the species.

That said, it is quite possible Gates, Buffet and others give donations to biomedical and other assorted research relating to life extension. It just isn't their priority, rightly so.