aurum

Yes, the more attached you are to things, the harder it is to let them go. Of course. I don't take it lightly, but I am open to the possibility. You are not. Which is why your vision is more limited.

Yes, I read it the other day.

I make no such guarantee.

It'll be made possible by people embracing geoengineering.

It's "wrong" in the sense that it mostly only motivates people away from negative outcomes. Defense vs offense. Leadership requires inspiration and purpose. Your thinking is so small.

Value is never equally distributed. But it's still distributed.

This is such a biased perspective of the US. The US provides some of the most value to the world compared to other nations.

Do you want to know the truth? Be honest with me.

Indeed. God intelligence wins again.

That's certainly part of the potential of geoengineering, yes. Not necessarily, but that's because GMO is still in its infancy. That's why I'd start a company around it. Don't confuse GMO food today with GMO food in a hundred years. "Replacing nature with our own creation" is literally all of civilization. Do you want to get rid of all of civilization?

Richard Dawkins is my favorite form of God denying that it's God

No, actually I'm very much against that mindset. If I had a billion dollars I'd start a GMO food company and engineer that too. ps organic food is a myth. You're hypothesizing a fantasy situation. Survival is never done.

Damn biology and its tradeoffs Where's my gene that just maximizes everything forever? If you're not yet 30, that makes more sense.

Sure, and you can call that out if you see it. I do it quite a bit. Guys bring all sorts of beliefs to the forum I don't agree with. But I don't think it's social degeneration to point out that everyone is maximizing their survival value. Or that a small percentage of men tend to have the most success with dating. Dating is competitive, and winners rise to the top. I find this highly illuminating. I think your real concern is that this will feed into male misogyny / victim complex / hyper-competitiveness. That is a risk. So there is a responsibility to explain these things to minimize that.

@Carl-Richard you're essentially talking about the lifespan vs healthspan debate. I think there is a tradeoff between performance and lifespan, as you mentioned. It depends on what you want to maximize in your life. Personally, I'm okay with less than "peak performance" if it gets me longevity.

Their actual "reproducing" days might be over, but they are still going to take care of their kids and maximize their survival in other ways.

Everyone living creature is maximizing its reproductive success within whatever constraints it has. Leo is correct about this.

How are you differentiating health & wellness from longevity?

Way less than that is needed to send you in the wrong direction, especially if you're older. Working out is wear and tear on your system. If your goal is longevity, the ideal workout would be one that minimizes the amount of wear and tear, but maximizes the benefits.

This chart dropped my IQ.

What do you think all technology is? Here's a potential example you might like: Imagine you could engineer a forest that changed colors based on air pollution or soil health, with the goal of providing visceral biofeedback to humans. It might dim in color the worse things got.

Of course.

I don't disagree. I'm just reflecting how it can come off. It may not seem like a big deal if you're a woman, but it's going to matter for a lot of men.

Funny enough, a lot of guys do idolize Tyler Durden. I don't know if you've seen Fight Club, but the line from the movie is "All the ways you wish you could be? That's me. I look like you want to look, I fuck like you want to fuck... I am smart, capable, and, most importantly I am free in all the ways you are not." It cannot be understated how many young guys got into bodybuilding exactly because they wanted to look like Tyler Durden with his shirt off. And of course guys idolize Tyler Durden and King Leonidas not just because of how they look, but because they're STRONG. Most men want to be strong. A lot of the conflict you have with your teachings is that it comes off as telling guys to be weak, soft soy boys. And of course many don't want that or aren't ready for that level of integration. Especially when they're already insecure about feeling weak.

I'd say that's actually debatable. The top woman is more classically beautiful. She looks elegant, very feminine and like a woman you might want to marry. The bottom woman comes off a bit trashy because of the tattoos and maybe her lips. Guys might be turned off for that reason. But I think it'd still be a close race on OnlyFans who would get more followers.