[patall]

The part that I do not understand there is: why would anyone/everyone else want you to be alive again? And do not understand me wrong, I would very much be interested to talk to people from various ages. Specific ones, but also commoners. But why should someone want to restore thousands of random people from (e.g) 1284 on their own cost? That only works if those people have big stashes of money that are legally still theirs. And while I understand that some may want to keep ownership after death, I think it is super dangerous to have something like that. Just image, 10% of the world today still belonging to Dschinghis Khan. That cannot be good.

[WitCanStain]

Perhaps in a near-post-scarcity world, resurrecting dead people is seen as one of the great humanitarian projects of civilization.

[echelon]

This.

Not to make a low effort comment, but this.

But that'll depend on things going smoothly and non-evil, non-dictators winning in the end. It'd be horrific if evil and malicious entities won and decided they just wanted to fuck with everyone.

[fennecfoxy]

Because death is the enemy, and the Jean Le Flambeur series by Hannu Rajiemi touches on this in pretty good ways. Won't spoil the plot, though.

It does put into perspective though, how distracted and selfish our species can be; oh, let's fight each other because of skin colour, sexuality, ethnicity, religion, fighting wars over resources, etc. Meanwhile people are getting cancer, have disabilities like blindness and paraplegia and generally just...dying, especially when it comes early, after a hard life. It's just so sad and disappointing that we have the resources to give everyone a pretty decent life while we work on solving these bigger problems...but we just don't.

[saalweachter]

Reverse parenting.

You raise your parents from the dead, they raise their parents, and so on and so forth.

Doesn't apply to raising random people from a thousand years ago, but it's a reason people today might be resurrected in a couple of centuries.