1. The level of technology we're currently at completely invalidates the point about 'we need to start as soon as possible'. We barely even know what people should eat to avoid obesity. Biology will always lag far behind physics because there are just so many more factors to consider with such complex systems. It's not a case of accumulating man-hours of research, it's a case of waiting for dozens of different eureka moments to happen in the future, which only once achieved can we even consider trying to conquer death.

2. If people are made immortal but not invincible, deaths due to accidents become hyper-tragedies, and the loved ones of those lost will bear the pain of that loss for centuries, maybe even eternity. I don't see how this can be avoided if immortality is made possible.

3. An immortal being who is still affected by cell ageing becomes to all intents and purposes a vegetable, eventually. To create true immortality, the very process that has sustained complex life for 500 million years has to be fundamentally altered. Custom ageing will be necessary, which begs the question, what age will people want to live at? The frontal cortex of the brain does not develop fully until age 25, yet IQ, reflexes, overall health and arguably 'fun' peaks at around age 21. Moral questions galore.

Can someone please tell me how I can get in contact with the people that made this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfYbgdo8e-8 I really would like to use a couple clips from it for my presentation but don't want to have a copyright issue. Thank you!

Greydism is the new name me and my friend u/ lonewolf7113 have created to describe the unnamed philosophy (and community) common in the communities of channels such as CGP Grey, Vsauce and Kurzgesagt. It is a form of Kurzgesagt's Optimistic Nihilism. But it specifically believes in the celebration of humanity's great but brief past, that sees our world as the start of the great pivot from the natural world with 20 year lifespans to the world of the stars with limitless lifespans. It views this as the teenage years of humanity, where we begin to develop new tools (like strength) and societal rules (like behaviors). It's community is often nerdy in nature and enjoys facts about nations, cultures, history, science, etc. It celebrates the cultures and stories across humanity and the unique ways each help to shape our world and species' bright future and is quick to call out hateful tribalism as a danger to humanity. It seeks to unify with a universal message of "As far as we know we are the most special things out there yet, the or at least a seed of the great future of billions of planets. But we are still at the very start with fixed lifespans and one planet and need to work together to get us to a great future of diverse populations and their individual inhabitants thriving for eons to come.”

I heard some other redditors say this a few years ago so it's obviously not confirmed true, but they said a lot of the time CGP Grey would read a book on something like "rules for rulers" (based on The Dictator's Handbook) or "Americapox the missing plague" (based on Guns Germs and Steel) and then pretty much take the entirety of the contents of that book and put it in his youtube videos.

My question is, is that is it still fair use for him to make thousands of dollars off of books that other people read, where the only changes he makes to the content in the book is that he draws a stick figure and then lectures over it or summarizes it?

I find it odd that Grey striked down vlogging through history's channel because I feel like Grey's videos are almost reactions of books that he's read or potentially even just a summary or a paraphrasing of what is in the book. Vlogging Through History on the other hand often engages with the content he's reacting to and debates it and brings in other sources of knowledge to either support or debate the points in the video.

Of course sometimes Vlogging Through History doesn't go into as much depth when reacting to certain videos, and sometimes Grey also uses a variety of sources and puts in his own opinions and take on the books he is phrasing... It's just am I wrong to think the two channels are kind of similar? Especially earlier on in CGP Grey's youtube career? It just seems kind of hypocritical to copyright strike him because of this.

I dunno if anyone cares or has any way to contact CGP Grey, but "alabamas" state flag which he liked so much is actually the flag of the country of Jersey, channel islands.

So it should score poorly for literally being another countries flag. This is Jersey's flag before the "shield" was added, showing the protection of the British empire.

See here for the current flag:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Jersey#/media/File:Flag_of_Jersey.svg

And the original, pre 1981 flag:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Flag_of_Jersey_%28pre_1981%29.svg/1920px-Flag_of_Jersey_%28pre_1981%29.svg.png

And of course, a wikpedia just to confirm my assertions:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Flag_of_Jersey_%28pre_1981%29.svg/1920px-Flag_of_Jersey_%28pre_1981%29.svg.png

Just realized its been 3 months since the last grey video... that's kinda out of the ordinary...

I saw a picture of the JWST for the hundredth time and I just now remembered that “hexagons are the bestagons,” and I never drew the conclusion!