HaveCourage

I mailed you

I think seasteading is stupid, however it shows a desire to experiment with governance itself.

Percentage wise how many bastards are crushed out of selflessness compared to vendetta? I think you'll find that the extra satisfaction of a grudge is needed to tip people into the honorable action.

Wouldn't any research Thiel funded that helped himself also help other 50 year old white guys? What's wrong with helping 50 year old white guys? (who will be 60-70 when the therapies are likely available)

If government surveillance is an commonly emerging property of modern governments, it could be said that doing it well instead of poorly may allow us to restrict its scope more. Thus better searching of the already never erasable data is better than gathering more data and searching it more poorly. Thus I have no evidence of Palantir doing anything wrong, however, I'm keeping an eye out.

I'm a camera/cinematography person as well, so we could always chat about that :)

I'm happy to talk about substantive issues. We can chat, discord, livestream, move over to reddit, I love speaking about cool ideas.

Peter Thiel finds its easier to be a contrarian because the masses are so wildly wrong about so many things.

Like the value of a college education: His scholarship fund accelerates kids lives into what they're passionate about instead of seeing them waste years in college.

Medical research: He funds longevity

Governments themselves: Seasteading

Competition: Promoting that people being definitive in their goals and working on things no one else is.

Crushing bastards: like the evil rag gawker hiding behind genuine journalistic protections.

If you're on the wrong side of an issue from Peter Thiel, it's not because he's being reflexively contrarian, it's because he could write a 100 page thoughtful essay on why his position is better than any alternative.

The reason that Peter Thiel seems so contrarian is because so many other people are so cowardly. Shouldn't more billionaires be crushing bastards? Shouldn't more billionaires be funding medical research? Shouldn't more billionaires be publishing books to motivate the masses to create themselves the future that has been only dreamed of for the last few decades?

On the short list of people in this world who are doing a really really great job with what they have, Peter Thiel is at the top of my list.

Now the caveats. Violations of the 4th amendment suck, and if Palantir is part of them, it's not great. Trump is clearly not the best the business world had to offer. Christianity, not so fabulous.

Peter Thiel is a gay christian republican billionaire philanthropist genius.

Peter Thiel is a visionary. His scholarship fund accelerates kids lives into what they're passionate about instead of seeing them waste years in college.

He funds longevity, seasteading, and promotes people being definitive in their goals and working on things no one else is. He also personally funded the hunt for justice against an evil rag hiding behind genuine journalistic protections.

If you're on the wrong side of an issue from Peter Thiel, it's not because he's being reflexively contrarian, it's because he could write a 100 page thoughtful essay on why his position is better than any alternative.

The reason that Peter Thiel seems so contrarian is because so many other people are so cowardly. Shouldn't more billionaires be crushing bastards? Shouldn't more billionaires be funding medical research? Shouldn't more billionaires be publishing books to motivate the masses to create themselves the future that has been only dreamed of for the last few decades?

On the short list of people in this world who are doing a really really great job with what they have, Peter Thiel is at the top of my list.

Now the caveats. Violations of the 4th amendment suck, and if Palantir is part of them, it's not great. Trump is clearly not the best the business world had to offer. Christianity, not so fabulous.

I consider the man a legend and hope to see great things from him.

If only the greatest of us didn't rot away and die. I think Feynman would be great to still have around.

It's better to make new productive areas than to fight diminishing returns and force there to be fewer productive areas. The founding of California and the USA are the result of such thinking.

The powerful, propertied generation dying and being replaced by people that look and do nearly the same hasn't cured any of the ills of which you speak so far. The rich have continued to get richer, and the poor richer at a much slower rate, death hasn't solved any of that, nor is it likely too. What you want is better marketing of good ideas, because that actually works. Wishing people dead for disagreeing with you is at least immoral.

Unfortunately, you are correct in that brain deterioration progresses faster than other forms of deterioration, which is why it's smart to focus on it over some other age dependent diseases. Your brain is a part of your body like your heart. Any cure for aging would obviously include the cure for mental deterioration.

It's a common misunderstanding that curing aging can be a pill. Aging is a quite loaded word. It means at least, curing cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's, cell loss, hardening, muscle loss, vision loss... So what an aging cure really looks like is lots and lots of cures because there's lots and lots of causes. The easy way to categorize what needs fixed is: Cells: too many, too few. Junk: inside and outside cells. Mutations: nuclear and mitochondrial. Finally crosslinking.

Fresh perspectives generate fresh perspectives. Birth doesn't as well, because schools tend to standardize viewpoints as do religions. If birth was a good cure, you wouldn't get regression. Like the dark ages, or what's going on in Iran. Rolling the dice and hoping for a better outcome is inferior to building and advertising better outcomes. It would be easy to dream the pro death people die off and be replaced with more adventurous types, but its not fair to wish for someones death because they disagree with you.

Would you rather have the problem of paying for your loved ones to still be around and healthy, or the problem of them being dead right now? Seems like a good problem to have. Imagine if their brains and bodies were still equivalent to 50 years old. You probably couldn't convince them to stop working. I detect lots of bitterness to the young male and foreign and little for old and citizen. Medical progress gets rid of old people too, they just remain young instead of dead.

Historically, as Lifespan increases war and poverty decrease. Its very easy to imagine the parade of imaginary horribles. Those horribles look out of place on a graph of global human fulfillment over time. It's so easy to dream how bad it could all go, that comments focusing on that are 10x the number of comments imagining any of the positive outcomes. Apparently the amazing and wonderful things people create together by not rotting and disappearing are harder to imagine.