Silicon Valley's Quest To Extend Life 'Well Beyond 120' 273
HughPickens.com writes: The Guardian has an interesting article on the current quest sweeping Silicon Valley to disrupt death, and the $1 million prize challenging scientists to push human lifespan past its apparent maximum of about 120 years. Hedge Fund Manager Joon Yun's Palo Alto Longevity Prize, which 15 scientific teams have so far entered, will be awarded in the first instance for restoring vitality and extending lifespan in mice by 50%.
"Billionaires and companies are bullish about what they can achieve. In September 2013 Google announced the creation of Calico, short for the California Life Company. Its mission is to reverse engineer the biology that controls lifespan and "devise interventions that enable people to lead longer and healthier lives." ... In April 2014 it recruited Cynthia Kenyon, a scientist acclaimed for work that included genetically engineering roundworms to live up to six times longer than normal, and who has spoken of dreaming of applying her discoveries to people.
Why might tech zillionaires choose to fund life extension research? Three reasons reckons Patrick McCray, a historian of modern technology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. First, if you had that much money wouldn't you want to live longer to enjoy it? Then there is money to be made in them there hills. But last, and what he thinks is the heart of the matter, is ideology. If your business and social world is oriented around the premise of "disruptive technologies", what could be more disruptive than slowing down or "defeating" aging?
"Billionaires and companies are bullish about what they can achieve. In September 2013 Google announced the creation of Calico, short for the California Life Company. Its mission is to reverse engineer the biology that controls lifespan and "devise interventions that enable people to lead longer and healthier lives." ... In April 2014 it recruited Cynthia Kenyon, a scientist acclaimed for work that included genetically engineering roundworms to live up to six times longer than normal, and who has spoken of dreaming of applying her discoveries to people.
Why might tech zillionaires choose to fund life extension research? Three reasons reckons Patrick McCray, a historian of modern technology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. First, if you had that much money wouldn't you want to live longer to enjoy it? Then there is money to be made in them there hills. But last, and what he thinks is the heart of the matter, is ideology. If your business and social world is oriented around the premise of "disruptive technologies", what could be more disruptive than slowing down or "defeating" aging?
Yet another buzzword! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:2,300 years ago, in China ... (Score:5, Funny)
Luckily this could never happen again today, because they need all those children for the Foxconn plant.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps Silicon Valley could find the 'Elixir of Life' in Japan
They already found it! [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
$1 million? (Score:5, Insightful)
So many billionaires in Silly Valley, and none of them is willing to invest more than $1 million in extending their lifetime to forever?
Clearly they don't expect much to come out of this research.
Re:$1 million? (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual, they're expecting a bunch of people to invest the money for them.
Re: (Score:2)
oh they're putting more than 1 million.. it's just that these particular charlatans managed to only find 1 million for this prize - which is meaningless anyways considering the worth of the invention would be much more.
but 1 million is small enough that they'll get new age charlatans up the wazoos trying to claim it with all kinds of diets and other shit. never mind that proving it working obviously takes quite a lot of time, so I suppose the prize might be claimable if you just make some worms live 12x t
Re: (Score:2)
If they are willing to put a million dollars that probably means they think there is a high chance for it to happen.
But I see this as Silicon Valley arrogance. If we apply software developers insensentives to any problem we can get it solved.
The longer you live...Cancer could be your reward. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've posted this in another post, and yet again.
A certain irreducible background incidence of cancer is to be expected regardless of circumstances: mutations can never be absolutely avoided, because they are an inescapable consequence of fundamental limitations on the accuracy of DNA replication, as discussed in Chapter 5. If a human could live long enough, it is inevitable that at least one of his or her cells would eventually accumulate a set of mutations sufficient for cancer to develop. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bo... [nih.gov]
Re:The longer you live...Cancer could be your rewa (Score:5, Insightful)
Its true that cancer is an almost inevitable consequence of simply living, and the longer you live the more likely you'll have it -- but many cancers are treatable, depending on the particulars of the strain. You think these people aren't prepared to pay top dollar for the best treatments when/if the time comes that their longevity has a consequence?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Some (most?) billionaires deserve 120 years of continuous radiotherapy and chemotherapy.
Re: (Score:2)
We see this all the time on Slashdot. Nerds in technology field A can at the same time be total Greenpeace MSNBC-slurping luddites in technology fields B, C and D.
Re: (Score:2)
Controlled cancer is the key because cancer cells in the right environment can live forever.
But they can't live forever organized as you or me.
Re:The longer you live...Cancer could be your rewa (Score:5, Insightful)
And why do you feel that defeating cancer isn't already part of the research into helping us live longer?
You can make the same argument about all of it, the longer you live the more likely you are to catch any deadly disease. The longer you live the more likely your heart is to give in. The longer you live the more likely you are to suffer a stroke. The longer you live the more likely you are to go deaf and lose your vision.
Cancer is no different, increasing age increases the chance of suffering all these things. Part of living older is defeating or delaying each and every one of these possible threats. What makes you think that cancer is somehow a distinctly different problem on the way to the same goal as the rest of it that means that it should be singled out and held up as a possible problem of increasing age more than anything else?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed,
And even if completely defeating cancer is not possible or achieved quickly (progress in partially defeating cancer is business as usual), the set of technologies they are seeking would allow us to live healthier, longer and more productive lifes until the cancer (or whatever) takes us away. This would be a huge deal for anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone will create expensive cancer detecting nanobots for that. These will roam your body and either eliminate any cancer and other threats before they get out of hand, and/or alert an also very expensive monitoring system. Constant monitoring is needed for detecting and replenishing failed nanobots.
Key word is 'expensive'.
Re: (Score:2)
The day we've won isn't the day when we find a perfect way to kill cancer cells. The day we've won is the day where we find a perfect way to revert cancer cells to normal behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
why bother? if you can kill the cancer cells and make way for non cancerous growth, why bother 'reforming' them? besides, don't many cancers present as abnormally fast growing tissues? Do you want those cells around, in any form?
Re: (Score:2)
Part of normal cell behavior is to die off when an area is too crowded. Your worst case of a "reform" scenario is the best case of a "kill" scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fundamentally, it's an inesacpable consequence of the second law of thermodynamics. However, this consequence can be avoided if you keep throwing energy at the system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(people who don't age still eat).
Hence, the use of the phrase "keep throwing energy at the system".
Re: (Score:2)
I need an upgrade. Sigh...
Re:The longer you live...Cancer could be your rewa (Score:4, Insightful)
So cancerous mutations represent a measurable delta-S that normal cellular processes do not? Do please, tell me more!
It's funny all of the things people try to credit to the second law of thermodynamics that aren't even talking about thermodynamics, as if you can user-define "disorder" any way you wish ("cancer sounds disordrous... so let's say that the second law of thermodynamics means cancer will occur!"). No, the only thing in that regard that's an inescapable consequence of the second law of thermodynamics is that at least some day all humans will be dead, as the universe will have died of heat death.
Re: (Score:2)
So cancerous mutations represent a measurable delta-S that normal cellular processes do not?
Yes, it's not magic. There are more states that lead to broken cellular processes than there are states that lead to normal cellular process. That leads to a measurable delta-S.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but thermodynamics is not about how many states there are in any arbitrary system. There's countless states in which you can win money in a casino and only a few (such as paying for chips or inserting money into a slot machine) that they take yours - does this mean that the second law of thermodynamics guarantees that you're going to beat the house? Is winning at the casino an increase in entropy?
Please stop taking scientific terms and making up your own definitions for them. The second law of thermo
Re: (Score:3)
I am talking about entropy. Actual entropy, not "let's take an actual scientific concept and pretend it means something that it doesn't" entropy. I'm not making any comments about whether people are going to change DNA any time soon. I'm simply talking about the abuse of scientific terms - entropy being one of the most widely abused. To everyone who's doing it: stop.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just a simple numbers game that a 99.999% reliable process is going to fail 0.001% of the time.
And a 100% reliable process is going to fail 0% of the time. You don't even need that level. Just get the reliability high enough that heat death of the universe (which breaks the assumption that you have more energy to throw) is more likely to happen first.
Re: (Score:3)
Cancer may not have to be the cause of death, but rather the cause of immortality.
Perhaps they can harness the same thing that keeps HeLa cells [wikipedia.org] immortal - sort of a body-wide 'cancer' that makes you immortal?
Re: (Score:2)
Far more likely (IMO) that cancer is a side effect of aging. We have merely reduced mortality from other diseases (including some other age related disease), which has left more people getting cancer.
I kinda doubt that telomeres are the key to aging. Rather, I think they are strictly a method for preventing cancer. Instead, I think that something is happening to c
Re: (Score:3)
I kinda doubt that telomeres are the key to aging. Rather, I think they are strictly a method for preventing cancer. Instead, I think that something is happening to cause a decline in the number of stem cells in the body as you get older, likely something to do with NAD.
As unscientifically as possible and no cite to really get your questions going (but I'd search /.):
There is (call it a rod) in each cell, each time the cell divides this rod loses a bit of length.
Say this rod is half the size it started at, then you are at half of your life (age).
If this rod shorting can be stopped a longer life should be a result.
Re: (Score:2)
I would use the analogy that lengthening telomeres is to preventing aging the way building taller buildings is to lifespan of jumpers. Better to just stop people from jumping in the first place.
Telemeres (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Telemeres - for now they look like imposing a pretty hard upper limit.
I pray to electronic Jebus you're right. I couldn't stand the idea of Paris Hilton or Brittany fucking Spears living another hundred years or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Both of those critters could be accurately depicted using CGI and at least for Brittany, her 'music' could be closely approximated by an Autotune processing a fifth grade choir.
So, best pray to your dear and fluffy lord that nobody thinks there is any money in those ventures.
Re: (Score:2)
Ref:Telomerase (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Ref:Telomerase (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What about this article in Nature which directly contradicts your snide presumption?
http://www.nature.com/news/201... [nature.com]
Given how we don't really understand if coffee and eggs are good or bad for us, and every month it seems to switch, it seems more than a little arrogant to condescend to someone who is basing their opinion on alternate though legitimate scientific theory.
Also, considering your GP post about telemeres, he was just asserting that the reduction of the telemere by DNA transcriptase can be reverse
Does not contradict (Score:2)
Also, why do you consider "for now they look like" and "consider X then get back to me" as "posting like an asshole"? I'm not pretending to have the absolute answer like someone rubbing a link in my face as if I've never read it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not aging as a whole, but the effect of the telemeres on aging was reversed in mice with premature aging diseases. Telomerase can reverse the shortening of the telemeres, that's what the enzyme does, just like DNA transcriptase pops off a bit of the telemere each time it copies it. It does not stop or reset aging, but combined with other therapies may be part of a treatment which does.
The telemeres themselves are only one component, in a very complex system, but it's not an intractible problem like you seem
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, I'm guessing that that isn't precisely what these guys had in mind.
Re: (Score:2)
How very nice for them. (Score:2, Funny)
May they find greatly-lengthened and considerable technologically-amplified pleasure in their lives while the remaining 99% of us scratch and grub for the barest minimum to achieve survival in this brave new world of post-scarcity possibilities.
I wish nothing but the best possible outcome for our obvious betters, those for whom life's problems amount to the tyrannical difficulty of deciding between thirteen hundred cases of Krug Clos d'Ambonnay or Domaine Jean-Louis Chave Ermitage Cuvee Cathelin when cateri
Re:How very nice for them. (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know about you..
but one of the greatest things about the modern age is the considerable technlogically amplified pleasure(entertainment, learning, naked pics) that are available to everyone even if you're a slob working for 5 bucks a day in Asia.
and hey, cheap sparkling wine ain't so bad either... the difference between having money today and 130 years ago is pretty big. if you didn't have big money then you had no chance of tasting sparkling wine.. even the cheap kind. or communicating on some online forum for that matter. think about it this way, no matter how much money you have your nethack or slashdot experience will be exactly the same.
Re:How very nice for them. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about you..
but one of the greatest things about the modern age is the considerable technlogically amplified pleasure(entertainment, learning, naked pics) that are available to everyone even if you're a slob working for 5 bucks a day in Asia.
A fair comment, I agree completely, and to be clear, I don't expect 100% leisure time or an age of work-less abundance. I'd just like to see everyone (myself included) continue to have a right to continue to earn a living. However the greed of the top percentage of our society will ensure this childish, fanciful and ridiculous dream of mine is unsustainable for the myself and most of our society. Western civilisation as we know it is returning on its unstoppable orbit, ultimately terminating in the embrace of serfdom. The Black Death was the only thing that allowed us to escape last time and then only at enormous cost.
Remember, as a '1-percenter' it's less about ensuring one wins, as that's already well-assured dear boy. More important is that everyone else loses! That's where the joy and the true victory lies!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the technology we need is the guillotine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Me too.
Sardaukar, please stop for a second. People aren't mad at what you have to say. They have a problem with how you're saying it and how you're taking everything way to personally. Try to relax and you'll have a much better time here. :)
The answer was in front of our faces. (Score:5, Funny)
Where do I claim my million dollars?
Re:The answer was in front of our faces. (Score:4, Funny)
With copyright infringement being so incredibly dangerous, no-one would think of dying whilst its still in copyright. All we would need are harsher copyright laws.
Re: (Score:2)
And doesn't Keith Richards have his blood replaced every three years or so? So there should be a lot of used blood around anyway for... testing. Yeah, testing, that's what I'll call it...
I should want to cook Keith a simple meal, but I shouldn't want to cut into him, to wear the blood, to be born unto new worlds where his blood becomes my key...
I'll be in my bunk.
Emotional investment (Score:5, Interesting)
It's popular to say one wishes for death at an arbitrary age... until one is that age and it's time to try to live or try to die. The upshot of recent news [youtube.com]is there's a very real chance that the first person to reach escape velocity [wikipedia.org] is already alive. Here's to hope for a prosperous and very long life for each of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's to hope for a prosperous and very long life for each of us.
Your overall premise is absolutely correct from my point of view. The Human body is a technology - we'll figure it out eventually, given time.
The so-called Deep Learning [youtube.com] phenomenon that appears to be snaking across the world may very well yield considerable insight, especially as we collectively come to terms with the 'big data' stuff
I must admit (and apologise) that I've been a bit angry in my last couple of posts. I'm really very concerned that this technology will have a terribly divisive effect, acceler
Found something you can't buy? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A collection of obscenely wealthy guys are upset that life won't let them get their way. Maybe if they at least admit they're scared shitless about it they can get their way.
Or a collection of obscenely wealthy guys make a low-cost (to them) investment with a potential return of increased longevity. You have no insight into their motivations, and your post sounds petty.
Re:Found something you can't buy? (Score:4, Insightful)
The "anybody who wants to prevent/stave off death is just 'scared shitless' " meme is one I've seen before from a wide range of sources, and I can't for the life of me understand how so many people can be so stupid. Fighting death is the logical thing to do, the *obvious* thing to do, whether you're rich or poor. Fighting death has given us life expectancies better than any other point in history. It has given us medical advances that seemed impossible just a few decades ago. It has improved quality of life across all ages. It has vastly reduced infant and childhood mortality.
It doesn't even seem to make sense as a religious objection. Biblical characters had vastly longer lifespans than we do - the concept of "Methuselah" as relating to longevity is fairly common, yet Methuselah's lifespan was merely the longest, rather than being exceptionally long compared to others of the same generation and lineage - and while some people are focused on ending death entirely (via things like brain uploading or cryopreservation with later revival), that doesn't apply to this project. It's not exclusive to the rich; rejuvenation and clinical immortality memes have been widespread in science fiction for decades, and most SF authors aren't exactly Scrooge McDuck. It is most common in the developed world (in many third-world nations, the fact that life expectancy can be higher is completely obvious, as their developed neighbors demonstrate) but certainly isn't exclusive to California.
The "found something you can't buy?" meme is also a stupid one. The vast majority of things people can imagine today - never mind things we'll be able to imagine in the future - are things you can't buy. People work constantly to bring new things to market. Prior to Tesla Motors, you couldn't buy a pure-electric car with a multi-hundred-mile range. Prior to Iridium, you couldn't buy a telephone usable anywhere in the world. Prior to the medical development of penicillin, you couldn't buy a cure for most bacterial infections. Prior to... you get the idea. Technology marches on. Today, you can't buy a life expectancy of 100, but that's no reason to avoid working on it!
Re: (Score:2)
Not getting your moon colony sucks and all; but not even space
Re: (Score:3)
followed by (Score:5, Insightful)
Silicon Valley's Quest To Extend Life 'Well Beyond 120
followed by the government's quest to extend the pension age well beyond 115
Really? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm 40 and I'm ready to check out. DNR, etc.
I've seen it all and can't build up much of an excitement for anything. I can't imagine that my Dad is 90 and my Mom 86 and they're both not showing signs of going anytime soon.
Just my luck to be stuck with depression *and* longevity. I keep telling people that I'm 25 years away from my best years in the past, but I don't think I can last another 25 just to live through the decay of everything I used to enjoy.
These idiots better work on getting rid of aging, not j
Re: (Score:2)
You are suffering from depression. Go see your doctor.
Re: (Score:3)
You haven't seen it all. Many people live 80 or 90 years and will tell you that they haven't come close to seeing or experiencing everything there is to life.
Your "can't build up much of an excitement for anything" is a textbook symptom of clinical depression, which is a treatable medical condition.
And even among non-depressed people, middle age very often corresponds to a dip in happiness [theatlantic.com] which passes on its own as people get older.
Look into vitamin D, more vegetables, less refined (Score:2)
More ideas here in my proposal on health sensemaking: https://www.newschallenge.org/... [newschallenge.org]
"We want to improve public health through free and open source public intelligence tools for individual and collective sensemaking about health topics -- especially related to nutrition and lifestyle choices."
Wish some billionaires wold fund that. :-)
Good fats are important for health and good brain function as your brain is mostly fat ("fat makes you fat" is BS; it's more that refined carbs and sugars makes you fat). Goo
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Greetings from another relative of Henny! (Score:3)
Wow, she was also an aunt of my father! Small world! :-) I think we might have commented on slashdot on that coincidence a few years back? But you'd have to be pretty old if she was your aunt, as opposed to, like me, a great aunt? I met her once with my father when she was still in her own home, and maybe incidentally another time or two perhaps (decades ago).
Glad that "open sourcing" runs in the family. :-) Although I might feel differently about open sourcing my body or DNA than open sourcing some softwar
If the biology that controls lifespan is reversed, (Score:3)
Suggestion: Develop an inexpensive and effective cure for cancer first.
Re: (Score:2)
Develop an inexpensive and effective cure for cancer first.
Oh, of course! Why didn't we think of that sooner? We'll just whip that up and call you in the morning.
Some rich people. (Score:4, Insightful)
Seem to be panicking upon realizing that aging and mortality are the great equalizers.
I see such things as the greatest form of selfishness, it wasn't enough they hoarded resources from people in their own generation. They want to continue to do so to their children.
Ah, the endless quest... (Score:2)
I don't care how rich you are, death will still claim you.
The ultimate equalizer is a bitch, ain't it?
Enough already? (Score:2)
Why might tech zillionaires choose to fund life extension research? ... First, if you had that much money wouldn't you want to live longer to enjoy it?
Or one could ask if, perhaps, they have more than enough for one lifetime and concentrate on other things.
midlife crisis (Score:4, Insightful)
Tick Tock, Tick Tock (Score:2)
I cannot help but wonder if Edger Allen Poe had a poem for Robber Barons.
The best techniques could be before puberty (Score:2)
QUALITY, not QUANTITY, damnit! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively this will only be accessible to the Rupert Murdoch's of this world...
No alternative necessary. You are entirely correct; this is exactly how it will turn out.
Yay for us!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Room4 quadrillion humans in solar syst. spacehabs (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... [wikipedia.org]
By me on that theme:
http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]
http://pcast.ideascale.com/a/d... [ideascale.com]
http://www.pdfernhout.net/prin... [pdfernhout.net]
So, plenty of room for at least another 1000 years of exponential growth. After that, it's someone else's problem, and there are more minds to think of solutions (like tapping zero point energy to create energy and matter in the void of space, creating new dimensions, etc.).
See also:
https://overpopulationisamyth.... [overpopula...samyth.com]
Re: (Score:2)
'Immortality', as an organism, is actually comparatively easy. We think of bacteria and the like as being 'imm
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It would also catapult the old philosophical chestnut of whether a perfect copy of you is you, or a distinct person very similar to you who will go on and live their own immortal life while you shrivel and die from the dusty pages of PHIL101 to practical application. That
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of an existence inside a machine fills me with dread. Without flesh...how do you hold your wife, or hold your kids? It sounds like hell. Here, you can observe all the things you love, but you can't touch, you can't taste, you can't smell...
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, but with extra resources, you could not only have the senses you have now, you could gain any number of other ones. See the entire spectrum of light, or have s
Re: (Score:2)
If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on strong AI before I'd put my money on a full cure for aging.
I guess you think strong AI isn't going to happen in your lifespan eh?
But a full "cure" for aging would require designing an entirely new species (presumably that looked and acted human) with all kinds of entirely new repair mechanisms and entirely redesigned developmental pathways.
Yep, sounds like a hard problem. Doesn't sound like an impossible problem any more than strong AI does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> and I feel FANTASTIC as a result
Of course you do, you're taking a pill. The contents of the pill matter little.
> Dude, there is a TON of low hanging fruit ... been almost no research into the field
Which means there's a TON of BS. Maybe I'm just a little older than you, but NAD is the latest in a very very very long string of things that ultimately proved to do nothing, as one would expect.
If it doesn't have a double-blind, it's not true. You should take that to the bank.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I'm glad you feel fantastic but can you point out where Niacin prolongs (or improves, I'll go for that) life?
Otherwise, I will suggest a brief perusal of the placebo literature.
Re: (Score:3)
The current state of the research shows that it effects cellular health/aging markers, effectively turning the cells of old mice into the cells of young mice. Last I heard, the same group that showed that was going to start a new study that looked at their actual lif
Re: (Score:2)
We've already created machines that have limited cognition. Just recently a lab group trained a neural net to identify not only objects within a still image, but what was actually going on (ie a picture of a girl playing with a dog was identified as such). This is already PRIMATE LEVEL COGNITION, but in a very limited domain. It just has to be expanded on until we can make one that talks.
http://www.kurzweilai.net/deep... [kurzweilai.net]
Re: (Score:2)
This being Silicon Valley, they feel there's some use to the hedge fund managers. It's fine though, they can happily use software patent lawyers for the early testing.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, if I were a life-extended tycoon, I wouldn't be too sure that merely avoiding old age counts as avoiding death; an
Re:Death is a creative force. (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine if Genghis Khan's life had been extended, or Stalin's.
So we have to kill a few tens of billions of people in order to kill off the Khans and Stalins? To damn the entirety of humanity for however long it exists to short, painful, ignorant lives? To create suffering on a scale orders of magnitude greater than anything these guys ever did or were capable of? If you were to actually do that, you would be even worse than those old terrors were.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine if Genghis Khan's life had been extended, or Stalin's.
... or Leonardo Da Vinci's, or Rembrandt's, or Einsteins, or Planck's, or Feynman's, or Mark Twain's. Any powerful tool can be used for good or ill.
Re:Death is a creative force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop trying to justify things just because you think they are inevitable.
Re: (Score:3)