Silicon Valley’s quest to live forever could benefit humanity as a whole — here’s why

“Technologies that initially are only affordable to the rich typically become more widely available with time,” Stefan Schubert, a researcher at the London School of Economics and Political Science who specializes in “effective altruism,” told CNBC. Indeed, this is true of everything from air travel to smartphones and medicine.

Tech investor Jaan Tallinn, the co-founder of Skype, told CNBC that Silicon Valley’s quest to live forever will eventually benefit humanity as a whole.

“I think involuntary death is clearly morally bad, which makes the quest for longevity a morally noble thing to engage in,” Tallinn said. “Early adopters always tend to pay more and take larger risks than the ‘mass market,’ so if therapies start off on the expensive/risky side, that’s to be expected.”

Tallinn added that he thinks it’s “counterproductive” to require that a new service be available to everyone before anyone is allowed to use it, but he said he understands the instinct.

Sean O hEigeartaigh, co-director of Cambridge University’s Center for the Study of Existential Risk, told CNBC that many advances in longevity science could have broad benefits, adding that they could reduce the occurrence or severity of older age-related diseases including dementia and heart health.

“Extending max lifespan significantly in the near-term seems unlikely to me; but identifying and arresting aging-related factors that increase preponderance and severity of age-related conditions is more plausible,” Ó hÉigeartaigh said.

Some are concerned that the Earth’s finite resources could come under strain if people live longer, healthier lives.

However, by the time meaningful life extension advances are made, Ó hÉigeartaigh expects population numbers to be more stable in more parts of the world.

“I expect meaningful lifespan extension to be a century or more away, and by then I expect a parallel change in societal attitude towards euthanasia,” he said, adding that he thinks euthanasia will be more acceptable and more common in the coming years.

While some believe that billionaires should be able to spend their money on what they see fit, not everyone thinks tech billionaires should be using their money to fund life extension research.

Jon Crowcroft, a computer science professor at Cambridge University, told CNBC they’d be better off pumping more of their billions into climate change mitigation technologies instead of longevity research.

“It’s a bit pointless living forever on a dying planet,” said Crowcroft.

But Tallinn told CNBC he finds the tech billionaire’s efforts to support longevity research “commendable.”

“I think it’s generally unfair to pit good causes against each other in a world where most resources are wasted on morally unimportant or even reprehensible things,” Tallinn said.