Longevity has the potential to be to traditional medicine what crypto is to traditional finance. It changes the terms of the debate.
Starting with Bitcoin's rejection of central banking & endless inflation, the cryptoeconomy has challenged virtually every premise of the state-controlled, paper-based financial system that we've inherited.
So far? Plenty of risks, plenty of loss — and undeniable progress.
The conventional macroeconomic wisdom is that high inflation is bad, but that deflation is also bad, so a little inflation is good.
But there's bad deflation, often due to contraction of money supply. And then there's good deflation, due to genuine productivity increases.
Similarly, the conventional medical wisdom is that untimely death is bad, but that life extension is unrealistic or undesirable. So a "little death" is good.
But there's bad life extension, being physically old forever. And there's good life extension, which is reversing aging.
It was hard to watch the financial crisis and imagine that DC & Wall Street had figured it all out, even if they papered it over with printed money.
It was hard to watch COVID and imagine that DC & legacy medicine had figured it all out, even if it was also papered over with $$$.
Because crypto rejected fundamental premises of the legacy system — that a little inflation was good, that holding your funds was too risky, that short-term volatility was unacceptable, and so on — it was able to stake out a new, opt-in environment very different from the old.
Similarly, longevity rejects the most fundamental premise of the legacy medical system — namely that death is inevitable, and arguably desirable — and thus branches the entire biomedical tech stack in a new direction.
What does v1 of the longevity stack look like? Maybe:
- Aging biomarkers as primary metrics
- Constant monitoring of multiple analytes > tests only upon symptoms
- Telemedicine & self-care > infrequent checkups
- Fasting & keto > 3 high-carb meals a day theatlantic.com/magazine/archi…
Anyway, I'm proud to be putting a bit of money where my mouth is. I'm an investor in @beondeck, where @realNathanCheng + team have launched a new longevity fellowship.
Could well be a seminal program in terms of getting more people into the field...
Also, sign up to his free newsletter. Helps me keep abreast of the longevity space.
Which, if my thesis is correct, will go from niche to everything just as crypto became all of finance. Because all of medicine is implicated in longevity...
The creator economy is becoming part of the cryptoeconomy. Because legacy social media platforms have no real concept of digital property rights.
Substack, Twitter Revue, and Facebook Bulletin are all great. But they are in a sense intermediate steps.
Ghost goes further. You can run it at a domain you control.
Decentralized social media platforms go further still. You hold the private keys.
Under communism, there was no such thing as personal property. Everything that transpired in the PRC & USSR was downstream of that economic illogic, the root cause.
The restoration of private property was one of the keys to unlocking the Chinese economy. npr.org/sections/money…
1) One day charts are highly volatile and we need to see where everything averages out. Some kind of drop looks real, but capacity may come online in other places.
2) The first chart (hashrate) is over years, the second is over months - otherwise you can't see the blip.
One somewhat vexing thing:
(a) when hashrate drops a lot, you want a quick difficulty adjustment
(b) but when hashrate drops a lot, blocks take longer to mine, so difficulty adjustment takes longer to come
Proof-of-work is absolute truth, proof-of-stake is relative truth. Both have their role. But for the most important transactions it's better to produce more clean energy than to give up on the undeletable history that accumulated work provides.
It's hard to express this compactly to a non-technical person, but basically: it's harder to fake the results of a massive calculation done over ten years with datacenters full of hardware than it is to convince a fixed set of humans to change their minds and rewrite history.
This is what we get when there is no absolute truth.
Using Merkle trees, we can prove the existence of arbitrary amounts of data using just one tx on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Data availability is nontrivial (IPFS?) but proof that the original photo existed would be feasible.
Google didn't *initially* compete with other companies *primarily* on its stock price but on its product.
Assets should likewise have unique features. Good example: Zcash's privacy sets & shielded transactions. electriccoin.co/zcash-metrics/
> Google didn't *initially* compete with other companies *primarily* on its stock price but on its product
Note: yes, when raising capital you're competing with other companies based on your stock. But the customer for your stock isn't identical to the customer for your product.
Now, it's true that customers of product (users) are increasingly becoming customers of stock (shareholders). Robinhood makes it possible to buy stock in products you use. Crypto makes this default.
That's powerful, but also turns many off. More product culture will be helpful.