As for dictators: it's not like guillotines stop working.
What will keep dictators (if eternally young, or their offspring if not) in power forever is competent and obedient AI manning the police and army.
They are immune to guillotines operated by peasants.
The only thing they don't have protection against is Government forces. With their armies of lobbyists, and other bought influence they have, they are also, largely, protected against those as well.
Yup, and they'll only know their methods are safe if they get the rest of us to try it out en mass.
> They are immune to guillotines operated by peasants.
> The only thing they don't have protection against is Government forces. With their armies of lobbyists, and other bought influence they have, they are also, largely, protected against those as well.
What makes them different from the French royal family, who basically were the government?
You don’t need guillotines, you just need one junkie at the right time.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11941061/Tech-exec-...
Still, that is averages. A cruel despot may never leave their palace fearing death and will always have security. They will have less opportunities for accidents.
Current global median life expectancy: 75.2 years
LE/I%: ~958 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rat...
Same but assuming we can avoid transport accidents, ~1354 years.
I can't agree. We can have eternal dictatorship now. Nothing prevents it except other people, therefore people will prevent eternal dictatorship just as now (with various results).
Anyway, Im ready to accept this risk.
These maniacs didn’t have enough time to accrue enough mass to become power black holes, but give them a century or two to work with..
Rulers, set in their ways, will take a government down an increasingly non-viable path.
We already see the advantage age provides when building influence for US politics.
If people could live for much longer then they’re likely disincentivised to procreate due to worries of overpopulation and then, in one way of thinking, you’re hypothetically depriving a line of offspring of lifetimes they’d otherwise have if you’d had what we consider a normal lifespan now.
Yes I realise there are probably an infinite number of takes on this, I’m just pointing out one possible way of looking at it for the sake of saying not all technological advances have universally positive outcomes.
I don't want to open a can of worms, but... about 40 milion people are aborted each year...
But amongst the popular left, there seems to be an aversion to competency and rationality, as they are symbolically linked to high status and social dominance. And so those who work deliberatively to end the scourge of aging and illness from humanity are—due to their displaying a rational results-oriented mindset—disdained.
That's all without even mentioning other benefits like cumulative knowledge of multiple lifespans being contained in one person allowing for new scientific breakthroughs.
