X-Message-Number: 29290 From: "Mark Plus" <> Subject: Re: Mark's lack of a future. Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:10:19 -0800 In Cryonet #29261, Perry Metzger came out from under his bridge to write, >About your "no one is doing anything", Mark: right now VC spending on >energy is on the order of tens of billions of dollars, though a few years >ago it was a tiny fraction of that. I have friends at some of the largest >VCs in the country, and they're all sending heavily on energy right now. The same kinds of people who also gave us the dot-com and real estate bubbles? I can almost guarantee that these venture capitalists have invested into nonobvious perpetual motion machines instead of real sources of net energy, with a depressingly familiar collapse of asset values to follow in a few years. Even within the oil industry, investment has doubled in recent years but output has stayed flat. (Refer to my other post about Matthew Simmons.) >Further, you keep saying things like "ah, with all these advances, what >good has happened for health care!" -- and you say this even as cancer >deaths are falling for the first time, as life expectancy continues to >climb, and as new medical treatments with real benefits keep pouring out of >the lab faster than we can absorb them. I have friends who are alive today >because of treatments that didn't even exist ten years ago. The rate of >medical innovation is astonishingly high, though all we hear from you is >how sucky things are. In your world, statins don't exist, gleevec doesn't >exist, the myriad of antiviral medicines developed in just the last ten >years don't exist. In your world, medically induced comas don't save >cerebrovascular injury patients, artemesin isn't treating malaria, >researchers haven't cured Alzheimers in test animals. I don't know where >your world is, but it certainly isn't Earth, because here, the biomedical >news comes out so fast that I can no longer keep up with the journals. In my world, and in the world of the highly regarded economist and Extropian sympathizer Robin Hanson, at least half of the healthcare we consume doesn't do a thing for health and longevity; we invest resources into it any way almost like a cargo cult: Fear of Death and Muddled Thinking It Is So Much Worse Than You Think http://hanson.gmu.edu/feardie.pdf Robin points out that the introduction of antibiotics in the 1940's and 1950's didn't even produce a blip in death rates, which continued to decline smoothly over those decades for reasons other than because of "progress" in medicine. I suspect today's over-hyped "wonder" drugs and treatments don't cause dramatic differences, either. Sure, some sociological groups now live longer, but we don't really know the reasons. Why, for example, do the Japanese enjoy the high end of the world's health and longevity even though they have the fourth-highest per capita consumption of cigarettes (and unfiltered ones at that, from what I've heard)? You might want to look up and absorb the implications of "confirmation bias" before you rely on personal anecdotes about people "saved" by modern medicine. People who defend the effiicacy of dowsing from their own experience make similar errors in inferencing. The existence of the world's documented "supercentenarians" (people who live to at least 110 years of age) also trashes a LOT of the current pseudoscience and quackery about "life extension." First of all, most of the ones I've read about lived their lives in poverty (black sharecroppers in the South and the like), so that immediately rules out expensive medical interventions to account for their longevity. And two, they did almost none of the things advocated by the likes of medical "futurists" like Kurzweil, for example, swallowing bowls of vitamin and antioxidant pills every day. Maybe they benefitted from involuntary caloric restriction because they literally lacked sufficient income to buy all the food they wanted. But they probably got to extreme ages (by current standards) from a combination of accidents like inheriting certain genes, suffering from a low initial damage load in their mothers' wombs and benefitting from some other factors we don't understand yet. If I personally make it the year 2030, I expect that some people alive then will repeat my ongoing exercise with 1970's "futurists." They will dig out the stuff written in the 1990-2010 era by Extropians and transhumanists about an imminent "singularity," compare that with their less than transhuman reality, and exclaim, "What the hell were they thinking back then?" I know what "they" thought, because I contributed a tiny share of it. Ray Kurzweil in "The Singularity Is Near" credits me on page 498 with coining the word "singularitarian." Mark Plus _________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE Web site, company branded e-mail and more from Microsoft Office Live! http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/ Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29290