Wednesday, June 20, 2012

de gustibus non est disputatum

Tyler points us to Robin Hanson's suggestion for your charitable contributions. To wit:

"The biggest single charity donation I’ve made so far is ~$100. But now I’m donating $5000 to an exceptionally worthy cause. And I suggest you donate too. Here’s my cause:"

Any guesses, people? Sanitation in the Sudan? AIDS in Africa? Education in Ecuador? Womens' Rights in Waziristan?

 Hell no!

It's this.

Yes, a different way to try and preserve your brain so that you can "live" forever.

I want to be judgemental, I really do.

But Mrs. A and I give roughly 50% of our charitable donations towards animal welfare (the other half goes to aid/development projects in Africa, Latin America & Asia), and I'm sure many people would criticize us for that choice.

I will say though that I would much rather have access to my 30 year old brain right now than access to my, shall we say, 80 year old brain in 2666.


Anonymous said...

Radical life extension, singularity, cryogenics, etc, is just premillenial dispensationalism for the kind of people who use the word "neurotypical"

Norman said...

I love Robin Hanson's blog, but I find his preferences inscrutable. That's the perfect video clip!

John Thacker said...

It's generally "disputandum." The passive periphrastic is used (with the gerundive/future passive participle) instead of the perfect passive participle, to indicate "must" or strong obligation.

Your version is more a "taste is something that will not be argued about," rather than a "taste is something that must not be disputed."