I asked every frontier AI model the same simple question: how many years of healthy life can drugs actually buy us? The answers were humbling — and the smarter the model, the more humbling they got.
Unfortunately simulated intelligence is trained on the wrong data and does not have any actual intelligence. While it can be a great tool, it's definitely going to give the wrong answer in this situation.
The seminal breakthroughs could appear at any moment, given the many angles being pursued by many gifted and funded pursuers. Get back to discovery activities, and let the journey be the destination until further notice. I'd gamble on a serious breakthrough within five years, but actually expect to die before it reaches me (currently age 73). I am just a soldier in humanity's greatest war. Why would I expect to fare better than a Russian recruit in WW2?
These are painful words, but true. I envy you; I always wanted to be you. What you do and how you approach it, how you think, the level of integrity and truthfulness you possess, is admirable. I'm glad you're in this place, at this time, the person to push these matters forward, even if it's ultimately very slow and difficult work.
As a 62-year old man, I am not in the least surprised at the results although I would love for my cautious views to be challenged. As it is, I expect to need biostasis if I'm going to see much of the future.
I wonder what these eight AI models would say about your post on NLRP3...
I'm 67, and I'm extremely confident I know a lot more about anti-aging than the various simulated intelligence models. (they have no intelligence, they don't "think" and they are trained on the wrong data).
We humans keep looking for a magic pill, or amazingly like in this article actually consider a few of them. Reality is more complex. It's essential to factor in mental attitude, physical activity, overall diet and once you've got all of those "good" then you add on a few impressive pills (none of which were listed in this article).
Unfortunately simulated intelligence is trained on the wrong data and does not have any actual intelligence. While it can be a great tool, it's definitely going to give the wrong answer in this situation.
The wrong "drugs" are being looked at. 😇
The seminal breakthroughs could appear at any moment, given the many angles being pursued by many gifted and funded pursuers. Get back to discovery activities, and let the journey be the destination until further notice. I'd gamble on a serious breakthrough within five years, but actually expect to die before it reaches me (currently age 73). I am just a soldier in humanity's greatest war. Why would I expect to fare better than a Russian recruit in WW2?
These are painful words, but true. I envy you; I always wanted to be you. What you do and how you approach it, how you think, the level of integrity and truthfulness you possess, is admirable. I'm glad you're in this place, at this time, the person to push these matters forward, even if it's ultimately very slow and difficult work.
As a 62-year old man, I am not in the least surprised at the results although I would love for my cautious views to be challenged. As it is, I expect to need biostasis if I'm going to see much of the future.
I wonder what these eight AI models would say about your post on NLRP3...
I'm 67, and I'm extremely confident I know a lot more about anti-aging than the various simulated intelligence models. (they have no intelligence, they don't "think" and they are trained on the wrong data).
We humans keep looking for a magic pill, or amazingly like in this article actually consider a few of them. Reality is more complex. It's essential to factor in mental attitude, physical activity, overall diet and once you've got all of those "good" then you add on a few impressive pills (none of which were listed in this article).
I'm aiming for 120 in good health.