I don’t think “genetic defects” belongs there. You could prevent cystic fibrosis but choose not to? That would be incredibly cruel.
Put me firmly in the give-it-to-everyone camp. Colour me optimistic, but I think the long-term benefits of such a clear and unequivocal win for science would far outweigh what it would initially cost us in terms of turmoil and strife.
I, too, would keep it for myself, and spike the drinks of people I wanted to keep around me for eternity. Until they pissed me off. 
I’d be like a vampire, really. Collecting friends and granting them the gift of immortality, but without all that pesky bloodsucking and/or sparkles.
But seriously, the practical applications of immortality involve heavy eugenics due to limited food, water, and land supplies. And I’m not comfortable with telling people, “You can have this immortality pill! But only if you get a hysterectomy.” Eventually, it would be used as a discriminatory factor literally everywhere you went. People who didn’t take the pill–whether they didn’t want to or didn’t have access to it–would age past a certain point (maybe late teens, whenever we as a society decide to start preserving people’s looks for eternity). And at that point they will no longer be able to get jobs, because we know they’re just going to die in 50 years. Whereas Jim over here could still be with us 500 years from now. etc (think *Gattaca *rules)
Health insurance companies would surely discriminate against the mortal. Immortals don’t need health care, just food, water, and shelter. So why would they keep paying their insurance premiums?
Also, we as a species aren’t evolved to cope with immortality. I’m pretty sure people would go crazy with boredom within a couple hundred years. We’d definitely have to legalize suicide booths. I can see a lot of crazy fuckers eventually doing the suicide-bombing thing. “I’ve been alive for a thousand fucking years and I hate myself and the universe! I’m saving these 200-year-olds the pain and suffering of being as miserable as me!” boom
In effect, we’d also have to revamp the criminal justice system. Murderers would be guilty of stealing potential eternity away from their victims, as opposed to a potential of 1-100 years of remaining life. How would we adjust sentencing to deal with that? And then, what do we do with people serving “life” in prison? An eternity in prison is surely crueler than a quick merciful death.
Also, there’s the whole religion thing. The world would probably explode in nuclear flames between the ones who took it and the ones who said it was heathen treasonry against god’s will, or whatever crazy fuckery.
Bah, it’s too much work! Why fix what isn’t broken?
[QUOTE=clairobscur;14379766I don’t remember how many. Maybe something like 600-700 years.
.[/QUOTE]
I recall that thread. But the big problem is even with that, “short term” its going to lead to a world population that could easily be 10 times what it is now fairly quickly. Given that experts are worrying about not sqeaking through the hopefully coming population peak that will be a fraction of that without serious long term damage to the earths biosphere and climate as it now stands, a population many times that probably gives them nightmares.
So, everybody gets to live a long time. Except we royally fuck up the planet, the world erupts into war over resources, most people who might have lived a long time die anyway from starvation or fighting and dropping atomic bombs, and maybe even first world civilization collapses setting us all back a long time.
It aint a given, but IMO it is a real risk of the live a long ass time pill. We might be ready for it socially and technologically one day but I don’t think we are even close right now.
Or short version. Saving everybody just so we can make em miserable and kill em aint such a great deal.
Actually, in a bit of grim humor, I had guys like this in mind.
And don’t worry, I’d plan on distributing the real pill as soon as the human population autodarwinated out a bit.
Fair enough. I can see the point. 
I think these discussions are interesting in that is shows the shortsightedness of people.
You find out you can live forever. Are you going to go in to that shitty job tomorrow just because it pays well and you can save for your retirement? Or, will you go back to school to get a better education? Or live on the beach for a few decades.
That urge to reproduce, to pop out a kid before you’re too old to have them anymore, to raise kids to replace you when you’re gone. Think it will still be there? Maybe. How about when you’re 200? Unlikely. Even if it is you’ll probably be better prepared to raise a kid at that point than someone in their 20’s.
I think many people can’t imagine the game changer that immortality would bring to humanity. The pressure to strive and compete with others lessens because there are potentially endless tomorrows to achieve our goals (and I’d bet most of those goals would change from what we have today).
The argument that we need death to make way for new life is groundless. Tomorrow we’ll be able to ‘evolve’ in any fashion we want to. We’re at the point of being able to manipulate genes for our benefit. To grow replacement organs in the lab. Why grow just a replacement? Why not grow something better? It will be possible. We will control our own evolution and each of us could be a world class athlete and the equivalent of an Einstein.
And if you manage to become bored with life, then because we will have thrown off useless junk like religion, mainly because worrying about what will happen after death becomes obsolete with death itself, there will be no ‘moral’ reasons left to stop you from ending your life. We will be mature and accepting enough to realize that each person is capable of deciding their own fate even if we don’t like their choices.
So, everyone gets the pill because humanity will change for the better. The world will change for the better. Why? Because we’d be living in our own shit centuries from now if we didn’t take care of things today. Right now many don’t care because they know they won’t be here to have to deal with it.
Thank you. I was starting to feel like I was at a Gothic poetry convention with all the acceptance of death.
While I can see the appeal of dying in the far off future, every time it gets close, I definitely don’t want to die. So I suspect I will not want to when the time comes. And thus I very much would want to take this.
In fact, I’m hoping there will be a game changer similar to this in my lifetime.
Leela: “Wait a minute…why aren’t you gonna kill us anymore?”
Bender: “Yeah, what are you? Chicken?” bok bok bok bokaww
Fry: “Shut up you two, we can kill ourselves when we get home!”
Anyway—on the question of overpopulation, a technical thought occurs to me: how is the anti-death pill (hereafter known as Antithanatol™) going to effect female fertility? My biological studies are a little rusty, but as I recall, while men produce sperm their entire lives, a woman’s supply of ova is finite. How is that going to be affected, biologically, by the patient’s aging being permanently arrested (at age, say, 25)?
I’m actually not sure if the medical or the sociological factor is the more fascinating question!
I’d distribute the pill far and wide.
Yes, I am aware that this would lead to overpopulation and war. Which is why I would join the army as soon as I could pass the physical.
Yes, death is a natural part of life. So are plague, smallpox, and AIDS. Doesn’t stop us from trying to cure them. People who romanticize Mother Nature have been watching too many Disney cartoons.
If you ever should find immortality to be a curse, you always have the option of suicide. But what gives you the right to compel other people to die?
Your right to near immortality ends where it royally fucks up the planet I am trying to live on (no matter how long or short that may be).
How about we decide whats each persons share of natural resources is. If you can make yours last 600 years have at it.
Since it doesn’t take a whole lot more capltal upfront to generate an income stream of $X forever than an income stream of $X for the next 30 years, I’d keep working long enough to put together that grubstake that I could theoretically live off of forever.
Then I’d quit, and live off it forever, or at least until standards of living increased enough that my income seemed pretty paltry, even considering not having to work. Then I’d go back to school, re-enter the workforce for long enough to boost my nest egg, then quit again. Rinse, repeat.
Why not? Being a father has given me more joy than anything I’ve done in decades. If I lived forever, I’d probably want to be a father again every 50 years or so. Hell, if I knew I wasn’t going to grow old, I’d have another kid now; really the main thing stopping me is the awareness that I’d be 80 before a kid conceived tonight graduated from college, and even in my relatively long-lived family, 80 is when the body starts to go.
I’m not so sanguine. On so many matters, changes in attitudes really only sink in as those who espoused the old, bad ways die off. Take acceptance of homosexuality, for instance: 50 years from now, nobody will give a shit if you’re gay or straight, because most people under 30 today don’t give a shit if you’re gay or straight. It’s people of my generation and older who are standing in the way here, and once we die off, the people who are young now will be better off in many ways for it.
If I believed age reliably brought wisdom, I’d be more sanguine. But for so many people, age just seems to bring a hardening of the beliefs and attitudes they’ve held all along. I don’t see how immortality will fix that.
And us oldies will be opposed to such tinkering long after younger folks embrace the idea. If you want everyone to be an Einstein, make sure we old folks die off, because too many of us will fight it tooth and nail.
Probably not possible as everyone else would have the same idea as you. Our economies would change drastically.
Again, you say that now, but who knows what your perspective will be in 100’s of years when you realize that each kid adds to the load on the Earth’s resources. I’m getting the impression that you’re one of the people you worry about living forever, who only do things for selfish reasons like bringing as many kids into the world as possible. ‘It makes you happy, just do it.’ That is the attitude that intelligence and long life would slowly erode. There is nothing wrong with doing things that make you happy, but only if the impact upon others is minimal.
Where do you think the hatred of homosexuality comes primarily comes from? Religion. When you can’t die then worrying about what will happen after you die is kind of pointless. Some people may take quite a bit longer to realize this than others, but it will happen. It can’t not happen especially if you can increase your intelligence.
Because so many old folks stop you from having a boob job now? How could they stop you from getting improved organs if you wanted to? Its all nice to complain about the smart young wipper snappers, but when you also have the opportunity to be just as smart and young, then you’re going to take it, current age not withstanding.
Please explain how this would work. In the immediate aftermath of the pill’s introduction, that is, not down the road a century or three.
At any rate, who said everyone else could have the same idea? I’m hogging the pill for myself, remember?
:yawn:
I’ve been hearing that line for 40 years now. Didn’t stop me from becoming a father a few years ago.
Feel free to make shit up about me if it makes you think you’ve proved your point. As someone recently said, if it makes you happy, just do it.
I was thinking of using racial attitudes as an example instead, and they didn’t come from religion. Or attitudes towards women - religion may have been aiding and abetting, but didn’t start that fire.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about genetic improvements, not cosmetic surgery.
I voted that the pill must never see the light of day. Living forever can’t be good for ones’ morale.
Another question suddenly occurs to me here. Can a person who says they will keep the pill to themselves, or prevent its distribution, honestly say that they wouldn’t rank higher than Hitler or Stalin as the largest mass murderer in the history of the world? While technically they wouldn’t be shoving people into ovens, they’d be like Stalin in allowing Ukrainians to starve to death when they had the ability to prevent it.
Most moral systems make a distinction between actively initiating something to happen, and inaction.
In some cases, inaction can be rather callous and you can be considered culpable for something but not usually the same magnitude of crime as initiating the event.
Especially in this case, where it is not simply a matter of all else being equal. There are some that believe that distributing the pill would increase suffering in the long term.
They KNOW that it would cure all disease (a good enough reason on its own, otherwise why bother trying to cure any diseases at all).
They KNOW it would cure death.
They BELIEVE that it will cause other issues.
Stalin: I BELIEVE that Ukrainians are a problem and should not be given food. I KNOW they will die because of lack of food even though I have the food to give them.
Not giving the pill to everyone = mass murderer.
No, we know it will cause other issues; it is the nature and mitigation of those issues which is debatable.
To remind you; my position is that the pill should be available and that conquering death and disease are A Good Thing. I am simply disagreeing with you that those who do not distribute the pill are guilty of mass murder.
Imagine you invent a chair that is good for preventing lower back pain. Is it now your responsibility to ensure that everyone on earth can get one of these chairs free of charge, else you’re culpable for their back pain?
Whoa. I never said free of charge there, bucko. I’d find a way to make people have to take it continuously and charge enough to at least cover the costs plus a hefty premium to ensure my own ‘retirement’. Then they’d have to sign an agreement to not have anymore kids while they are on the pill. Having kids means they never get the pill again ever. Even the charity cases will have to sign the contract. I’d make it available under my conditions. It would be their choice to follow those rules. Because while I disagree on how people will react given immortality, in other words, I BELIEVE they will act a certain way, that is quite a bit different from KNOWING. Sometimes you have to guide people in the right direction.
And people like RTFirefly can be happy following their desire to have kids while knowing the consequences of doing so. Everyone wins. Act irresponsibly by overpopulating the world, no pill for you. Act responsibly, then you get the pill. Now that I think about it, line cutters don’t get the pill, either. The no jerk rule applies.