Sure he was a pacifist at one point, but at another point, specifically when Hitler rose in Germany, it was Einstien that signed a letter to the president Franklin Roosevelt urging that a bomb be built. So in the realm of possibility its not absurd.

EDIT: Just a though, if we lived to be a millennium then we might possibly see jesus? lol

He also later called that the greatest mistake of his life. That is, he learned, through experience. He became wiser.

It's therefore not only unlikely but slanderous to suggest that "most probably he would be working for the military trying to create something that would destroy a whole continent."

You no doubt know this, if you know about the Einstein–Szilárd letter, and it's intellectually dishonest to leave it out of your posts.

I'd reiterate that I doubt even most people who can afford the ongoing treatments would bother. Even people who reach 60, 70, 80 are often ready to retire, ready to kick back, sometimes even ready to die. 300?

Professionally, only a minority of professions actually need experience more than a few years. Then there's professional boredom; some people will rotate professions because they'll want to do something different.

Birth control might get tricky if you introduce this, but as-is, pretty much every first world country's reproduction rates hit the floor. The economics of the situation are always a factor in reproduction. In a lot of situation where people bother to have ten kids, there is a reason.

So all I'm saying is that you can actually curb it quite a bit by just keeping health-care standards high and affecting the "game" such that having 1 or 2 kids ever is a good solution. This is already done and many countries have negative growth. So whenever I see people pressing for the use of authority to keep others from having babies, I usually see either a hint of bureaucratic\authoritarian thought, misanthropy or chimp-think (i.e. those indians and chinks are having too many babies).

Again, a cure for aging might alter that game, but we don't know what the uptake, details (can you continue reproducing? does your brain start to suck?) or implications would really be.

A most probable fact -- only the rich people would have this technology at first. And they would make sure it would stay that way until something better arrived.

If a 1000 year life span became common, then I think we would see employment shifting a lot.

I think "Retirement" would become "Take 10 years off and go do something for yourself, learn something new, and get back on the job market." Or some variation of that.

Work 10 years, travel the world for 2.

If we ever wanted to evolve, increasing our lifespan would probably work against us. Disease would probably take over, we wouldn't be reproducing as much (or at all?), less genetic mixing. If for 1000 years population never reduced due to old age we should hope we'd be able to leave this rock too. I think we are already stressing out our earth enough.

It would probably end up being some sort of 'elite society' of people who get to live that long, enslaving all the 'mortals'

[quote name='D.Chhetri' timestamp='1309965680' post='4831822']
Sure he was a pacifist at one point, but at another point, specifically when Hitler rose in Germany, it was Einstien that signed a letter to the president Franklin Roosevelt urging that a bomb be built. So in the realm of possibility its not absurd.

EDIT: Just a though, if we lived to be a millennium then we might possibly see jesus? lol

He also later called that the greatest mistake of his life. That is, he learned, through experience. He became wiser.

It's therefore not only unlikely but slanderous to suggest that "most probably he would be working for the military trying to create something that would destroy a whole continent."

You no doubt know this, if you know about the Einstein–Szilárd letter, and it's intellectually dishonest to leave it out of your posts.
[/quote]

Ok true, but just because he learned from his mistakes doesn't make him unlikely to commit them again, especially as a result of threat. Imagine you were the military and here is Albert Einstein who has gained immense knowledge about physics and possibly chemistry. Sure there are plenty of genius out there, but none of them was/is Albert Einstien. So (remember we're thinking like the military) would you not do *anything to have him work under you? Ideally Albert would just agree, but I'm sure the military would have to do some interrogation before they could get him to agree.
But the point I'm trying to make is, that if they really wanted him, they would have him, even if they had to use threatening statements against his loved ones.

Ok true, but just because he learned from his mistakes doesn't make him unlikely to commit them again, especially as a result of threat. Imagine you were the military and here is Albert Einstein who has gained immense knowledge about physics and possibly chemistry. Sure there are plenty of genius out there, but none of them was/is Albert Einstien. So (remember we're thinking like the military) would you not do *anything to have him work under you? Ideally Albert would just agree, but I'm sure the military would have to do some interrogation before they could get him to agree.
But the point I'm trying to make is, that if they really wanted him, they would have him, even if they had to use threatening statements against his loved ones.

Are you the type of person who just can't concede a point, no matter what, and will argue infinitely?

[quote name='D.Chhetri' timestamp='1309970602' post='4831861']
Ok true, but just because he learned from his mistakes doesn't make him unlikely to commit them again, especially as a result of threat. Imagine you were the military and here is Albert Einstein who has gained immense knowledge about physics and possibly chemistry. Sure there are plenty of genius out there, but none of them was/is Albert Einstien. So (remember we're thinking like the military) would you not do *anything to have him work under you? Ideally Albert would just agree, but I'm sure the military would have to do some interrogation before they could get him to agree.
But the point I'm trying to make is, that if they really wanted him, they would have him, even if they had to use threatening statements against his loved ones.

Are you the type of person who just can't concede a point, no matter what, and will argue infinitely?
[/quote]

Nope, I Admit defeat if that makes you feel better. But I get my persuasiveness advice from here

If we ever wanted to evolve, increasing our lifespan would probably work against us. Disease would probably take over, we wouldn't be reproducing as much (or at all?), less genetic mixing. If for 1000 years population never reduced due to old age we should hope we'd be able to leave this rock too. I think we are already stressing out our earth enough.

It would probably end up being some sort of 'elite society' of people who get to live that long, enslaving all the 'mortals'

That's only looking at it from a natural evolution standpoint. If we overcame aging, the amount of knowledge we'd have with people living 2-3 generations longer would be tremendous. As someone had previously brought up, think of what Einstein or Tesla would have been able to do if they lived even 100 years longer.

One large question for me would be it's effect on poverty. On the one hand people will have more time to advance and better themselves increasing their potential to get out/stay out of poverty. On the other hand there would presumably be a larger workforce.

"[color="#1C2837"]If we overcame aging, the amount of knowledge we'd have with people living 2-3 generations longer would be tremendous"
[color="#1C2837"]
[color="#1C2837"]I've thought about this topic a lot and this was my impression; that we nearly abandon the idea of iterating ourselves and instead focus on a kind of mastery we can't achieve in 50-70 productive years.
[color="#1C2837"]
[color="#1C2837"](In principle we'd also be developing genetics a lot in this same timeframe.)
[color="#1C2837"]
[color="#1C2837"]((And if it's only a few rich people or key professionals, most people are still iterating at the same rate anyway so...))