Some arb here:

@Daniel_MC only a 3-4% chance of him living to 120 in this market.

Is it considered cured if all humans are dead or otherwise exist in a form not subject to (the same) age-related diseases?

no, yes

@Bayesian you're saying aging is cured if we still die of other age related diseases?

I'm saying it's not considered cured if all humans are dead, but it is considered cured if humans exist in a form not subject to aging

(^my opinion of what the title should be interpreted as)

@Bayesian "exist in a form not subject to (the same) age-related diseases" implies the possibility of "exist in a form subject to (different) age-related diseases", no?

good point, i rephrased it in a way that was accurate

How can this be resolved at closing time? What if there's a supposed cure but then it later turns out that the patient still dies eventually?

@benjaminIkuta we'll know it when we see it

@BenjaminIkuta I wonder what your AGI timelines are, and how you think AGI will affect aging research?

@Nikola well, if Yud is right mana won't matter anyway. Otherwise, curing aging is hard.

@BenjaminIkuta If we had a million full-time scientists working on curing it, how long do you think it would take?

@Nikola idk

@BenjaminIkuta What evidence is there that curing aging is hard, other than that it simply hasn't been done yet?

AGI was supposed to be hard, and then within a year we went from toy chatbots to a machine that has an IQ of 101 and claims that it's conscious.

Like every other problem, once the amount of computing power needed to cure all disease is close, medicine will go from primitive to complete cures within a year.

@SteveSokolowski for AGI, we know that intelligence is possible. Because of 2nd law we know that curing aging is very hard / impossible to do completely.

This depends mostly on the percentage of the world economy allocated to funding relevant research.
Aging, if defined as "the set of non communicative, non-parasitic diseases which biological humans die of today", can in my opinion be cured with existing technologies, or technologies which can be implemented with existing manufacturing methods.

What is not certain is the reason why aging research has under 0.5Billion USD in annual funding.
Meanwhile the pharmaceutical industry has upwards of 700Billion USD of annual funding.

If aging is instead defined as the "set of all non-communicative, non-parasitic diseases which biological humans could ever die of" then this market resolves to NO

https://twitter.com/StoopMensch/status/1734240901676015623

The biggest blackpill on current longevity research is that there aren’t any 30 year old lab mice

You’re telling me you want humans to live forever and you can’t even get a mouse to midlife crisis yet??

@BenjaminIkuta Current longevity progress provides very little evidence for whether it will be solved by 2050. By 2050, we will likely have superintelligence, which will make curing aging much easier than it is today.

@Nikola Metaclus has P(AGI pre 2050) at 83% and the time between AGI and ASI at tens of months in expectation. Humans don't need to solve aging. AI will (assuming it doesn't kill us)

@Nikola Superintelligence may be sufficient but is not necessary for curing aging.
AI technologies will help aging be cured sooner by lowering the costs of research to below the present funding waterline.

I think there will be a cure but it will be very expensive and mostly involve swapping out old organs with freshly grown ones.

@JimAusman This does nothing to solve brain aging beyond knock-on effects of organ failure which worsen brain aging.

@JosefMitchell There is already research in these areas which is making progress.