Negative aging might become possible in Bernd's lifetime according to aging pro:
https://youtu.be/StvXtCzzxvE
Lörs onjons?
Bernd
2022-10-05 14:03:17 ⋅ 1y
No. 229641
>>229639
too poor to afford it
Bernd
2022-10-05 14:28:02 ⋅ 1y
No. 229642
>>229641
NMN is not that expensive
Bernd
2022-10-05 16:59:00 ⋅ 1y
No. 229666
>>229664
How is that any different from rich families where properties, valuable assets, connections and influence are passed down with generations?
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:05:40 ⋅ 1y
No. 229669
>>229667
And how is that any different from medicine (hygiene and food industry as well) development in 20th century that dropped infant mortality rates by multiple times? It also fucked up the population number predictions and also initially belonged only to some countries.
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:11:14 ⋅ 1y
No. 229671
>>229668
>if the family is not very traditional
And what if it is? I mean, the fact is right now you also have to compete with people who have much more right from the beginning. People are born with different social and economical statuses. Some of them still win this competition, some of them end up being imageboards users and that's not going to change.
Btw with some anti-aging tech development birth rates will also drop quickly as these rich resourceful rejuvinated boomers won't be very interested in having lots of children.
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:28:44 ⋅ 1y
No. 229676
>>229672
> means that old people will stay in power longer
Did you know people sometimes get replaced in their high positions without dying? **I know it's not how things done in Rusland but still...**
Would be fun to see how monarchies deal with that though. Some princes and princesses could become disappointed.
>>229675
Besides children and hired guys there're also other ways of relationship you know. For example a friendship built up for hundreds years could be very hard to break I believe. And your own kin could become just a distant relative to you after few hundred years having their own life.
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:35:42 ⋅ 1y
No. 229677
>>229675
>your kids are basically your ultimate most loyal friends often times
this you?
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:35:54 ⋅ 1y
No. 229678
>>229664
Biggest threat to humanity is that that old people will be reluctant to give up their power and wealth - an important aspect for humanity is that old people die and pass down their wealth and power towards younger generations. Thus humanity will start to stagnate when necessary changes will not happen anymore as they do today when even the richest people die somewhat young - or they used to - many Rotschilds seem to never expire and it took long for the Queen to die too. But this will only become worse as we speak since people are living longer, and on top of that imagine having anti-aging technology that will let old powerful people to live for hundreds of years?
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:41:50 ⋅ 1y
No. 229680
my grandma is is a milionaire and hasn't worked a job even once in her life
meanwhile I struggle to pay the bills
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:43:10 ⋅ 1y
No. 229681
>>229680
How did she become a millionaire?
Bernd
2022-10-05 17:46:19 ⋅ 1y
No. 229683
>>229681
she dumped the butchers son who was the nr1 chad of her village and married a bernd instead who many years later became a professor for maths
pretty smart move
oh ye i forgot she used to be a model and did some shootings, if you want to call that "work"
Bernd
2022-10-05 18:09:17 ⋅ 1y
No. 229685
>>229684
Track record says otherwise.
Russia committed coordinated regicide and failed to get rid of monarchy.
Italy didn't commit coordinated regicide yet got rid of monarchy.
Bernd
2022-10-05 18:11:20 ⋅ 1y
No. 229686
>>229683
Interesting. I wonder when the million(s) came into her life. Or does a math professor earn such good moneys?
I wouldn't call modeling work, since it's qualifications are something you are just either born to or not.
Bernd
2022-10-05 18:28:42 ⋅ 1y
No. 229693
>>229690
I'm referring to the fact that Russia still had monarchy after Romanovs were gotten rid of.
Bernd
2022-10-05 18:36:57 ⋅ 1y
No. 229697
>>229694
>if it's not hereditary it's not a monarchy
lol, lmao
monke is far from being the first one to do it since btw
Bernd
2022-10-05 18:49:51 ⋅ 1y
No. 229702
>>229699
Now you're just being obtuse.
As I said, power being hereditary is completely unrelated to whether something is a monarchy or not.
So I don't know why you are deflecting the opposite way and implying that USA should then also be called a monarchy when its non-monarchical power was in practice hereditary. That's just the other way around.
Is e.g. Vatican not a monarchy?
Bernd
2022-10-05 19:02:57 ⋅ 1y
No. 229705
envy is disgusting
Bernd
2022-10-05 19:12:19 ⋅ 1y
No. 229707
>>229664
I don't know much about the subject and neither did I watch the video but I don't think it's about becoming immortal but rather just looks that could make it so you look younger than you actually are
There's a hormonal imbalance condition which Andy Milonakis has, he is a full grown adult but he looks like someone who is 15, so judging from this alone then it could definitely be a possibility in the nearby future.
I am pretty confident that this isn't about immortality.
Bernd
2022-10-05 19:32:58 ⋅ 1y
No. 229708
>>229707
It is precisely about slowing down and reversing aging so that you actually are younger than your chronological years in terms of heaöth and fitness (compared to the average person)
Bernd
2022-10-05 20:00:30 ⋅ 1y
No. 229716
death is such a great and equalizing thing for people, we should protect it like freedom
Bernd
2022-10-05 20:15:18 ⋅ 1y
No. 229730
>>229711
as cool as it sounds on paper I really can't help but think about the fact that these fantasies we might have about the future are an unhealthy way of thinking about how the future might end up being like
Our short lives and the progress we have achieved so far in terms of technology makes for wild ideas that for the most part aren't directly connected to how technology may present itself in the future. If you really think about technological progress then you also realize that we're reaching a point of somewhat technological stagnation, there's no evidence that proves that we're going to ever become as advanced as so many people are fond of thinking about in the current age we find ourselves in. These ideas like transhumanism have become a pastime for people who consider the human race to be a little bit more potentially intelligent than we might be, it's a no-brainer that technology that exists now will only improve, and I have no opposition to it, but the question is how long it will take. I am under the belief that it will take such a long time for consumers to actually be subject to futuristic ideas like the ones that are so often entertained by individuals who surround themselves with technology-related ideas that imagining what it may be like for people like us in the age we live in is unreasonable.
I sincerely am under the impression that such concepts lie so far into the distant future that we might as well be discussing science fiction.
Bernd
2022-10-05 20:25:43 ⋅ 1y
No. 229731
If state mandated eternal life becomes mandatory, then why worry? Maybe the real solution is that you can kys at all times?
Bernd
2022-10-05 20:49:07 ⋅ 1y
No. 229744
>>229732
>These people are not religious and they would laugh if you tell them about prophets claiming to see the future by vision of god, but they really believe that some sci-fi book written by a faggot is like a holy book describing how things should and would look like in the future.
I think we're starting to reach a point in time where technology in itself has become a religion for the masses. I am not against technology in any way, but the amount of people who over-glorify technology in recent times have become fanatical and obsessed with futuristic ideas.
I think we're right now in a stage in our civilization where we've enjoyed the fruits of technology so much that we have been starting to lose touch with what is real and what isn't. It's a form of shared delusion that these people have, glorifying technology, considering stuff like science to be something similar to a god, it is unnatural. You aren't even allowed to talk about certain subjects anymore without getting shut down by someone who considers himself higher than others and want to ''debunk'' using le based logic and sources he found over the internet. These people are so delusional that they think they have the authority to be capable of judging what types of conversations are allowed to exist and ones that are not. The very foundation of everything we know has basis on there being the freedom to discuss a variety of different subjects without being called out on not adhering to some imaginary standards people have nowadays. There's value to just about any intellectually stimulating conversation, and who's to say that a question that might not have seemed very logical or rational, end up having outcomes that benefit everyone who took part in the discussion. Often times it's not about the destination of a discussion, but rather the journey itself, talking about things that lie close to the hearts of people shouldn't be shameful, if we really are destined for great things then surely the interactions we have with eachother would eventually end up as being overall productive to every living person on earth.
The progress that has been taken place in recent times feels somewhat forced, instead of it arising in a way that paces itself with the overall knowledge of most people in the world. If we really are as intelligent and have as much potential to do great things as we think, shouldn't we just exist and progress would happen naturally, instead of this forced type of progress where the top 1% of educated people think they control and have influence over the entire planet?
Honestly, this really makes me think.
Bernd
2022-10-05 21:02:10 ⋅ 1y
No. 229746
>>229740
Paedophiles will be happy I guess.
Bernd
2022-10-05 21:13:55 ⋅ 1y
No. 229748
nonces get out reeee
Bernd
2022-10-05 21:33:54 ⋅ 1y
No. 229754
>>229747
I think I got a bit sidetracked there with the openness for discussions stuff, I'm going to try to talk about technology in itself.
Technology nowadays has become so user-friendly that we don't even know how the things we use on a daily basis function. This is a direct contrast to progress that were made in the past, something like a car engine, for example, it came out of necessity and not long after a lot of people had somewhat of an idea of how car engines worked. Even nowadays, in order for you to get a drivers license, you are questioned in how an engine works and how to potentially fix it yourself. This will never happen to something like smartphones, it can all be traced back to Apple and Steve Jobs trying to make complicated technology as user-friendly as possible. This entire concept of user-friendly technology has lowered the bar greatly to be able to use technology we might as well consider to be magic. In my opinion this is one of the defining things of our current age, technology has out-paced the ability of the consumer to be capable of keeping track of. Growing up I always admired technology, I was extremely grateful for computers, but I had no clue in the world of how they worked, and neither do the grand majority of people who every single day dedicate a large portion of their time on such devices. Nobody is expected to know how the technology they use work, not even barely, but they still use it every single day a lot of the time. I don't think we'll ever reach a point in time where consumers are educated enough to be able to figure out how the technology they use frequently works, how to fix it and so on and so forth. Devices are nowadays made for the stupidest most uneducated person in the world, and they are meant to be as simple as they could possibly be. User accessibility is a massive part of how highly advanced devices are made, they completely put aside an individual's abilities to comprehend the devices that they use. I think personally there's a direct relation to the fact that these new devices aren't necessary and therefore their availability is a luxury, they are not necessarily there because they are very useful but because it has its roots in hedonism more than anything. We had phones that were small enough and were very functional to use, in comparison to something like smartphones, for example, the majority of its features aren't necessary but instead fun. With that said, there are some benefits to smartphones like apps that make messaging other people easier, that is one quality that I cannot deny being very useful, but at the same time this same feature could have presented itself in different ways than how it exists today.
Bernd
2022-10-05 22:12:26 ⋅ 1y
No. 229757
>>229755
>Well, you can peel off some of the magic just by learning the programming language. Its not as hard as you think. In a way you are making a deliberate choice by staying in the second caste of people who don't understand how it all works. Because you could transcend into the upper caste of people who see through it, just by dedicating some of your time to learning, but you still remain on the user-level, instead of leveling up to the programmer-level.
I absolutely agree with you, but I just feel like this point in a perfect world wouldn't even have been a topic of discussion. In the past, people who made use of technology were tech-savvy, it was a necessity for someone in the past to have a basic understanding of the technologies that were there at the time, this basic understanding of the technology nowadays is completely gone. It's a crime towards people in themselves, lowering the bar as far as it has been lowered, all with the business aspect of increasing the amount of people able to use that technology and generate cash from said technology. I definitely could dedicate myself into learning some programming and such, it would actually interest me a deal because I spend a lot of my time in front of the computer and for someone who has spent this long in front of a screen, it should be a given that I were to know a little bit more than an average person does.
However, there is no necessity. I could in theory spend the rest of my life completely ignoring the technical aspects of how computers and technology works, even on a basic level, and still be able to use them. Maybe not to their fullest extent, but still manage to get by. We're making money off people that don't know anything about technology, and have no desire to learn anything about it either, this concept to me detracts from what could potentially be considered some form of progress in society. The business aspect of creating technology for the masses is incompatible with the intellectual value that could have been extracted from being at the very least somewhat tech-savvy, understanding the basics of how at the very least the devices that are the most popular among people work.
The entire industry is made for people who don't know how technology works nor have any intention on learning how they work. For this to change, we would need to cut down on user accessibility and make popular devices require some basic understanding from the consumer, in that way we would be making money while at the same time educating a large part of the world's population simply through exposure to a little more savvy concepts.
They appeal to the average user, and the average user is not able to understand such basic concepts. But that's where the money lies, in appealing to everyone, and by everyone it unfortunately in this point in time means someone who doesn't have a lot of potential to grasp such things as programming.
Bernd
2022-10-06 04:49:25 ⋅ 1y
No. 229809
>>229755
>i'm so smart i leveled up to an untermenschen codegarch. ikea helpers make more than me. you can be like me
fuck this russoidfag is dumb.
Bernd
2022-10-08 02:38:29 ⋅ 1y
No. 230449
>>230360
and that's why capitalism is bullshit and the elites and all the corporate executives are all midwit retards. daneball is correct, and never proposed difficulty, just not stupid simpleton shit as the standard. gaming is a perfect example of this.
Bernd
2022-10-08 04:36:58 ⋅ 1y
No. 230499
>>229809
>racial equality
prolly some old school programmer who is paid extra for not being a toxic kohlchanner
Bernd
2022-10-08 06:13:47 ⋅ 1y
No. 230587
>>230499
Wrong it's a woman or nonwhite, or both, who does next to nothing and has next to no skills.