[Daniel_sk]

Death is by design and is a vital part of evolution. I don't have issues with trying to make our human lives a bit longer (and preserving same quality of life), but achieving biological immortality would open a lot more problems.

[ben_w]

There are species that have negligiable sensesence, QED death isn't vital part of evolution.

But even if it was, why should we limit ourselves to evolution? Evolution did not design us to go to the moon, to split the atom, to have transplantable organs, to fly, to brush our teeth with fluorinated toothpaste, or to use contraceptives — it has only just managed to keep up with us wearing clothes and cooking our meals.

[digging]

> Death is by design

This betrays a deep misunderstanding of the mechanics of evolution. Design is literally not even part of the equation. I suspect you actually know that, but may have let an emotional response confuse your position.

Radical ideas like "let's stop dying" often evoke powerful irrational responses from all sorts of people, but it's very important to stop and consider the source of that response.

For example, I'm envious of those who would live in an age of immortality (if it were to happen), as I don't expect such an outcome for myself, but I don't want to take that away from them if it's a real possibility.

[pfdietz]

This is getting close to negative eugenics. You might want to rethink your position.

[lm28469]

This is just what life is... We can spend all day talking about fairy tales of living forever but this is reality lol. What position is there to rethink ?

[ben_w]

Wrote the commentor on a sheet of glass and metal, sharing their thoughts at the speed of light over a planet-spanning communications network with thousands of nodes in low-Earth orbit, while others on that network acts as patrons to sponsor such research as "can we grow mouse fibroblasts in gatorade and other soft drinks as part of an ongoing project to build a meat robot?" (the answer, is this is surprisingly more viable than they expected).

It's very easy to be overconfident where the boundary is between fairy tales and engineering, the boundary between fairy tales and science is even harder, and even domain experts can get that wrong in both directions.

[sriram_malhar]

Not really some variant of eugenics. GP didn't identify any subset of humanity

[pfdietz]

That evolution be allowed to operate unencumbered by mitigation on human populations is literally a eugenic position. It's not necessary to identify specific genes or traits that evolution would act on for this to hold.