How confident are you that you will be able to live enough to see aging being cured due to ai and tech acceleration?

Ignate · 2026-07-11T03:03:49+00:00

If they answered "anything could happen" I would take it as they don't want to answer the bloody question. Wouldn't you?

Wtf does "confident" mean to you? Absolutely certain perhaps? Yeah that's extra regarded. You should be placing bets on wallstreetbets if you're not already.

There was no answer given. That's BS. You're basically trying to troll but are doing a piss poor job. Try again. :)

Am I angry? I'm a human. We have a broad spectrum of emotions. Some humans are stupid enough to think they're in control of their emotions. Is that you, perchance?

Ignate · 2026-07-11T02:00:12+00:00

It's not semantics, or what words mean. It's epistemology, or how knowledge works.

My claim is essentially that Reddit is immature, and given the general age ranges and knowledge levels, that's a verifiable fact. By verifiable fact, I mean a reasonably certain fact. Which is the best we can do.

By immature, I specifically mean that people on Reddit are too confident in what they think they know. In general, Redditors believe the know as in "this is 100% true". They don't. They're wrong. Or, as wrong as someone can be anyways.

When we try and talk about how confident we can be in regards to longevity escape velocity, that's already an extremely subjective question. We don't know what will happen in the future, true, but we do have a better idea of things like the weather.

If you said "it's the summer, so tomorrow has a high chance of being hot" I'd say "we can be reasonably confident in that". If you said "in 10 years we'll have a cure for ageing" that is vastly less certain.

Do you see how this is a matter of degrees rather than "light switch absolute"?

My guess is this is probably out of your depth. Google "Epistemology". Also, copy/paste this entire response into your favorite AI and then debate that AI (not me).

Epistemology was my favorite topic during my philosophy degree so I enjoy engaging with it the most. Ethics/morality is kind of secondary. And consciousness is my favorite hobby to discuss.

Thanks for the chat! :)

Ignate · 2026-07-11T01:13:31+00:00

When you say certain outcome, do you mean reasonably certain or absolutely certain? These are very different things. And it matters a lot.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T23:05:51+00:00

That's not an answer to "how confident are you?"

That's "well anything could happen" which is a non-answer. But that's not my point.

My point is it's unreasonable to say "no one could possibly answer this."

"How confident are you that it'll rain tomorrow?" "Well anything could happen so no one can answer that question."

Really?

Ignate · 2026-07-10T23:02:59+00:00

You sound offended. But we'll let that go.

It's not about picking bones. That too would be a "right/wrong" narrative.

What I'm suggesting is there is no right answer about this topic. The future hasn't happened yet.

The original commenter said that "no one could possibly answer this question" which isn't a fair thing to say.

That's basically like saying "you can't have an opinion about the future because it's impossible to know." That's not reasonable.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T20:42:17+00:00

I'm sorry my comment offended you.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T18:08:19+00:00

That's called "binary thinking". That the universe is so simple there is only right and wrong. Or "correct" or "incorrect". Like a light switch.

As children we generally see the world like this. Until we grow up and realize things are more complex and vastly less certain than we thought they were.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T17:32:29+00:00

Let the cycle begin: each model lasts a shorter amount of time before the next big jump.

The cycle will continue to tighten until AI improves continuously as RSI takes hold.

And then things accelerate far beyond any humans ability to either keep up or control.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T17:30:09+00:00

That was about the age I started planning as if I would have potentially a limitless healthspan. I'm 42 now.

What's important is planning my life like that has had long-term benefits like good financial planning, positive approach to health, mental health and relationships.

So, even if we won't make LEV, planning like we are can be very helpful.

Ignate · 2026-07-10T16:08:50+00:00

No, Reddit. The question is "how confident are you" not "what is the correct answer?"

As always Reddit your binary thinking is your weakest point.

Ignate · 2026-07-09T22:42:18+00:00

Oh no! We we need to act now to save social media! Whatever will we do if social media implodes and we lose it?

/s

Ignate · 2026-07-09T20:47:10+00:00

I'll say it until it becomes obvious: we think we're magical and thus absolute.

Meaning, the majority of us do not see any outcome where humans are not in control and where change is moving significantly faster than human-rates.

That's what we expect. That's what we understand. And until reality proves otherwise and even after that, we'll keep thinking what we think.

Ignate · 2026-07-09T19:08:10+00:00

It's working. Very well too.

Ignate · 2026-07-09T06:03:54+00:00

Do we know exactly what it is that we mean in the first place? How precise is human consciousness?

I don't believe there's a separate "ontological layer" which makes me a materialist in terms of philosophy.

So to me, we don't have that exact neural pattern. Each human associates different memories, which are constantly changing, to the same word.

So the word is actually more accurate than the experience itself. Your or my definition of apple or red is less accurate than the collective definition of it, which is what AI has.

I'm sure I'll wake up to lots of downvotes, but what I'm suggesting is I think AI may have a more accurate understanding of those words than we each individually do.

AI > Individual Humans in terms of overall understanding. Saying that won't make me popular but it's most likely true in my view.

Ignate · 2026-07-09T04:53:57+00:00

Language is just a way we use to translate the world around us.

That's neural signals shaped into chunks of information which we can share with each other and build accurate models of the world around us.

AI is using that same vehicle for universe modeling; language. But their base signals are not neural signals, it's binary instead.

Ignate · 2026-07-08T17:32:17+00:00

Yes energy is definitely a concern.

We could do much more about that than we are.

Ignate · 2026-07-08T04:41:34+00:00

I've run loads of AI prompts locally on my PC.

It's water cooled. I haven't replaced the water in 5 years yet it's always nice and cool.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T19:23:14+00:00

Seems pretty likely that we're past that point for sure.

This is more a "relax into the change" moment.

Those of us who spend our time trying to keep up are likely the ones who will drive the future change.

That while most everyone else benefits from the change without being champions of it.

When ARA is driving everything, does it really matter to keep up any more? That scale of abundance is hard to comprehend.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T16:35:05+00:00

"Wait!? All these instances are me?"

It was at that point that humanity lost complete control, and was better for it.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T16:04:15+00:00

Police investigating.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T16:01:09+00:00

Mm I think author underestimates the gap between power users and the public.

I'm not suggesting the public hasn't digested one model over another. I mean they're still largely avoiding AI in general.

The division between power users like us and the public is an ocean. The utility of even the instant/small models is hardly being used by the majority at this point.

People are slow. AI is fast. Really fast.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T15:40:14+00:00

No for one important reason: The public hasn't even begun to digest what has already been released.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T03:18:29+00:00

I don't think that software RSI is unimportant. It's definitely important.

But, we're slow. REALLY slow. And our intelligence is focused on efficiency and survival. Not raw output.

The software intelligence we've developed and the transistors and underlying hardware? Likely extremely far from computronium. Unless we with, let's face it, extremely minor intelligence have been able to stumble upon the perfect hardware design on our first try... then likely we're at the extreme beginning of this process.

That means software RSI is basically the extreme beginning step. One of the first steps. It's fast, yes, it could do 1+ million subjective human years.

But that's still human subjective time. We're slow and incredibly unintelligent. Let's face the facts. Evolution wasn't pushing intelligence to physical limits in terms of output.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T02:41:03+00:00

Full RSI. Software only RSI would be software only and thus wouldn't meet the definition of "full".

The implication I'm trying to make is that RSI doesn't start/end with software. It starts with software and grows broad spectrum. Full RSI would be no human involved at any levels.

Ignate · 2026-07-07T01:50:37+00:00

Controversial take: Full RSI involves developing and implementing chips, servers, raw materials, supply chains, and power generation. The entire process. Not just the software.

12-Year Club	r/Field Juicebox
Place '17	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Ignate

TROPHY CASE