CryoNet #31757 - #31759

CryoNet - Tue 23 Jun 2009

    #31757: Re: Why hasn't cryonics become a status symbol? [David Stodolsky]
    #31758: Re: Why hasn't cryonics become a status symbol? [Go Cryo!]
    #31759: Hello again [Chris Manning]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31757%2D31759

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #31757
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Why hasn't cryonics become a status symbol?
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:42:37 +0200
References: <[email protected]>

On 22 Jun 2009, at 11:00 AM, Mark Plus wrote:

> The misconception persists that only very rich people can afford  
> cryonics

Badger (1998) stated, "Group differences based on Income approached  
statistical significance". That is, the wealthy are more likely to  
say, "I believe that cryonics is an exciting idea and intend on  
looking into it further." This was the only action item on the survey.  
And "Individuals making more than $100K were generally more favorably  
disposed toward cryonics". So, there is some evidence that this is not  
a misconception.

My reanalysis of this data concluded that only atheist millionaires  
would likely be attracted by current marketing. Therefore, it is  
likely that any misconception there is, is reinforced by the current  
marketing strategy for cryonics. The fact that less wealthy  
individuals can afford cryonics - assuming they don't prefer to use  
their money on their children, etc. - doesn't change the overall trend  
and therefore perceptions.

Status symbols have to be symbols, that is, visible signs. There is  
very little in cryonics that can function like this at the moment -  
maybe a bracelet or a card. These don't measure up as compared to a  
big house, fancy car, etc. Also, since cryonics is still regarded by  
many as a scam or foolish, and maybe even a threat - to the  
environment due to overpopulation, etc. - it doesn't have the  
unambiguously positive perceptual value needed to be a status symbol.


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31757

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #31758
From: Kennita (Go Cryo!) <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Why hasn't cryonics become a status symbol?
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:45:23 -0700
References: <[email protected]>

Once it's featured on "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous",
maybe it will. It might help if even a handful (or a double
handful?) of such people were wearing their bracelets around
and telling people about it in interviews and at parties and
such  Then again, maybe not.

Live long and prosper,
Kennita

Mark Plus <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> ...The misconception persists that only very rich people can afford  
> cryonics...[and] that they have signed up for it in considerable  
> numbers. Nicholas von Hoffman promotes this belief in an essay he  
> published in The Nation magazine a few years ago:
>
> Freezing Their Assets
>
> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060227/vonhoffman
>
> Normally, the kinds of things that only very rich people can afford  
> tend to become status symbols, like mansions, yachts, private jets,  
> or in an extreme case, a trip to the International Space Station  
> care of the Russians.
>
> If so many ordinary people believe that very rich people have  
> flocked to cryonics, why hasn't cryonics become a status symbol like  
> the other goods, services and experiences very rich people tend to  
> buy and that many non-rich people wish they could have as well?
>

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31758

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #31759
From: "Chris Manning" <[email protected]>
Subject: Hello again
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:12:08 +1000

I recently realised that I haven't received any CryoNet posts/digests for about a month. Also, two attempts to post an email failed.

I inquired of webmaster Kevin, who told me that mail to my address failed for the 8th time
on June 7, so the software automatically deleted my subscription. I have now re-subscribed. I don't know what the problem was - I didn't change anything - although I recently had a technician do some work on my computer, which may somehow have caused it.
 
In the meantime I have briefly read some of the recent postings on the website. The discussion about time travel/recreating the past/rescuing people from the past is interesting and has of course been the subject of many science fiction stories. ('Guardians of Time' by Poul Anderson is one that comes to mind, especially the bit where a time traveller tries to rescue his doomed girlfriend from London during the Blitz.)

Someone mentioned the desirability of cryonicists forming a community to minimise their risk of non-suspension due to indifferent or hostile relatives or officials. I support this idea and would be happy in principle to join such a community. I intend to investigate this idea further when circumstances permit.

Kennita may be interested to know that I recently discovered that my CD player is also a DVD player. This possibility had never occurred to me, for various reasons.


 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31759

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************