[diatone]

Iiuc it wasn’t a comment about what the perfect lifespan is. It’s expressing a concern about how people in power might apply life extending technologies, like they do many other technologies, to exercise and entrench that power.

Or put differently: it’s a request, given limited resources let’s expend effort on a fairer society, not one with longer lived people.

[JumpCrisscross]

> people in power might apply life extending technologies, like they do many other technologies, to exercise and entrench that power

Sure. One of which would be broadly granting access to it.

Like, if a country tried to restrict such technology to its leaders, you could probably trigger regime change by simply promising to share the technology in the event of deposement. Every party member who barely missed the cut would become your revolutionary.

[diatone]

That’s possible, I suppose. I think @btbuildem was expressing a personal distaste for other uses of power, and an avulsion to the technology because of that. For example: labor camps.

[JumpCrisscross]

> @btbuildem was expressing a personal distaste for other uses of power, and an avulsion to the technology because of that

Nihilistic Luddism. It works against any argument for making the world a better place.

> For example: labor camps

...what's the connection between longevity and labor camps? Empirically, as life expectancies (at birth and in adulthood) have risen, the prevalence of labor camps has gone down. We can see this both longitudinally and between countries.