X-Message-Number: 4676
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 19:29:00 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Eugen Leitl <>
Subject: longevity of cryonics associations

Thomas Donaldson wrote:
 
> Mr. Leitl's question is highly relevant, but his support for a claim that 
> commercial companies only last a relatively short time should have lots of
> caveats. Not only that, but I personally believe it is important to look at
> institutions which are NOT commercial companies.

The main problem is still: expensive (several ten k$) very long term 
(50-200 years) highly controversial (attacks from common sense, religion
_and_ mainstream science) service provision without any disruptions 
(continous cooling line) whatsoever, the customer being 
unavailable/incommunicado most of the time (being "on the rocks").

Cryonics _is_ special, but is it special enough to be beyond any
economical reality, however ugly? Would we wish it to assume such
a status? (E.g. the church is a class all by itself and it persisted 
for almost two thousand years, but would it make sense trying to emulate 
_that_?).

> One major problem with commercial companies, if we want to seriously discuss
> how long they last, is that, first, we look at a highly skewed sample if we
> look at all those currently in business. The entire idea of an incorporated

I think comparing the lists of former companies still existing now is
sufficient. It may be a normal distribution (bell-shaped), probably even
an exponential decay function (since most companies die first). 
Currently, the percentile of those surving even for few decades is 
negligeable.

Would a cryonics company resemble the archetypal commercial one, signing
a cryocontract would be a terrible risk indeed.

> company is no older than 200 years (with other roots further back). Not only
> that, but some studies have shown that their lifespans follow a pattern
> quite unlike those of living things: they have a high deathrate in the early
> stages, followed by very great persistence afterwards. Furthermore, we are
> living at a time in which many companies are being founded, new, all over
> Europe, the Americas, and much of Asia. If we go back 200 years, we find a
> very few incorporated associations anywhere ... not because of deathrates,
> but because the legal idea of incorporation simply did not exist then.

We cannot extrapolate 200 years into the past. In fact we cannot even
extrapolate over 50 year spans. I don't think I have to point out the
fact that recently the "persistance coefficient" has dropped dramatically.
Especially in hitech areas, but not only there. The technological progress,
admirable as it is, has adversely influenced stability. Company flux is 
likely to grow even more pronounced in the future.

[ British India Company description snipped ]

I don't think this is a valid comparison. For one thing, paradoxically
it is too old: most of its life time was spent in a world drastically
different from ours. It was backed up by an authority. Trade is a 
mainstream occupation. And it picked up steam very rapidly, accumulating
vast traffic volumes and resources right from the start.

None of it applies to cryonics. 

> Many German companies came back after the war, others did not. Here
> survival depended on many different factors, in West Germany at least.
> Eugen Leitl might be much more informative if he were to simply look
> at the history of Germany with an eye to corporate survival. Some changed
> their names, of course, but I don't see how that really implies a 
> failure to survive. If I recall rightly, Krupp is still a major German
> industrial conglomerate.

Krupp, IG Farben (cut up and renamed), Messerschmitt Boelkow Blohm, 
Siemens & Halske, Heckler Koch and lots more persisted. Hell, they even 
thrived since they constituted the bulk of military complex of German war 
economy. Any other civil industry either died or was converted very rapidly.

Mike said no crycorp could have possibly survived WWII, and
he is right. Today, any major world wide military conflict (it need not 
to be A+B) would disrupt the brittle storage cooling line. This is the 
worst case: doubtless all patients will be lost, then. 

The question remaining is: would a major economy crisis be fatal to the 
average cryocorp? Which strategies can be used to overcome that? (Many 
thanks btw you all for the very detailed explanations in the last cryonet 
message. I see things somewhat clearer, now).

[ churches & gov't ]

Monarchies and churches are special. The former are almost extinct,
the latter are facing grave problems, especially now. Though there 
might be overall growth the cults are fragmenting. Prospects do not 
look good for them on the middle run.

> What does this tell us? Yes, it would be wise not to tie cryonics to
> any one US state or even one country. And the more widespread our membership
> becomes, the more havens will be available if one particular state or
> nation tries to stop us. At the same time, the US (at least PRESENTLY)

Sure this is sensible, but how will this help against a major economic 
depression? Hyperinflation will rapidly gobble up any fortune however
large. The economical system is intrinsically nonlinear and with the 
introduction of digital money within next 10 years or so we are likely to 
enjoy (?) a period of undampened oscillations, threatening global 
economy. Even if this will not happen, forecasting smooth economy over 
a time span of one century is somewhat presumptuous, I think.

> seems relatively stable in its attitude (or perhaps blindness) to cryonics.
> It's not clear to me just what should be done about this now, other than
> to try to cultivate cryonics in other countries too. If the situation 
> were to change so that we would be seriously threatened HERE, then I 
> would expect that things will have changed in many other countries, too:
> either in our favor or against us. Where we might take our patients and
> ourselves in such a case is hard to predict.

Emergency transportation will not be cheap and will require buffer
infrastructure in location. The monies necessary are surely taken into
account by most cryocorps, but currently there isn't any out-of-USA 
cryonics infrastructure worth to be spoken of, apart from UK Alcor (?).
E.g. Germany, having only 2 cryonics members, is certainly a white spot
on the cryonics map. Even the former Soviet Union, desastrous as its
economy is, has currently about 15 or something members.

> As for religions, I think they may have ideas for us in their organization,
> but that is a long discussion. Perhaps later, when we can somehow discuss
> the organization of cryonics societies in a context free of personalities.

Though cryonics may resemble a religion on the first glance (it's faith
basically being based on belief in Progress) it promises immortality in the 
flesh. I don't think any religion (Zen Buddhism, may be?) will tolerate 
_that_.


> 			Best and long long life,
> 
> 			Thomas Donaldson


-- Eugene


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4676