🏅 Top traders

#	Name	Total profit
1		Ṁ106
2		Ṁ67
3		Ṁ47
4		Ṁ44
5		Ṁ32

23 Comments

317 Holders

540 Trades

Sort by:

Still nothing

Realistically according to the every day immortality, I'm betting no, but philosophically I don't think immortality is even possible since there is no life without change, and I interpret that as requiring the deaths of previous versions of a human, what a person would call their past selves. A series of infinite projects would necessarily change a person even if they had a sense of continuity, and these changes require a living person to be continually reborn anew and the old version to die.

predicted NO

@parhizj Also:

(1) you will not literally live forever in any event, if only because of thermodynamics
(2) if you live forever, there will still be:

(a) A number of years X such that you will never (and I mean never) remember anything happening longer ago than X years

(b) A number of years Y such that you will never have strong evidence of having been alive Y years ago

(c) A number of years Z such that you will never have any evidence at all of having been alive Z years

predicted NO

@DavidBolin I don't think this holds if "I" am getting larger at a linear rate with time.

predicted NO

@MartinRandall I believe he is referring to the Beckenstein bound. Correct me if I am wrong, @DavidBolin

predicted NO

@parhizj I didn't know about that bound, but it looks like increasing my radius linearly with time would allow me to linearly increase my maximum entropy with time, even holding total energy constant.

predicted NO

Just to clarify guys. I am holding this market to a high hurdle of imortality. For example, a drug that ends the aging process or a successful revival of a cryogenic. Something the mainstream media would report as imortality.

predicted NO

Are people betting YES ironically or they are betting on me solving this one incorrectly?

predicted YES

@MP either incorrect resolution or some stupid inarguable definition of immortality like "hey your Facebook page lives on forever".

Otherwise, why make the question?

predicted YES

@MP as an example of the second see the gal who made a chatbot to simulate her dead boyfriend based on training set of his texts.

predicted NO

@NickAllen because of the April's fool video I quoted in the tweet. It sort of repercuted as a joke on fintwit.

Anyone watched "The Consultant" because immortality ain't all it's cracked up to be.

predicted NO

@BlackbirdImmersive If you don't like it, you're free to opt out when it happens.

@NLeseul promise?

@NLeseul that made me think: If the only limiting factor to your lifespan is your willingness to maintain your body -aka. will to live- then legalizing suicide seems like an obvious next step. After all you can't force people to live forever.

But well, in the end we will probably adhere to some arbitrary schelling-point like regarding loss of will to live under the age of 70 as a mental disorder in need of treatment whereas people who underwent some longevity treatment and lived to a higher age -say 120, or choose another number- it would be regarded as a normal fact of life, just like aging nowadays.

Everything in between will be subject to never ending debate and moral outrage.

predicted NO

@Schwabilismus Yeah, there'll be some complicated evolution in social norms that will need to happen. But in the near-term discussion, reminding people that they'll be perfectly capable of dying if they really really want to does mitigate most of the dystopian paranoia that the idea of immortality tends to trigger in people today.