Each answer resolves to PROB, where PROB is the proportion of people that were born in the specified year that are still alive on 1 Jan 3000. They don't have to be basic unmodified humans, but there should be a wide agreement that yeah, that person is still alive in some form.
1,000
3.00Define alive. Can you preserve the brain in aldehyde, then be reconstructed later? Does being alive mean avoiding having ever died or can you die and have something like you take your place a century later?
Cause given current preservation techniques, I could imagine an AI breakthrough akin to protein folding that can bring back minds that were preserved even with imperfect methods.
I think all of these should be the same, and they should all be proxies for 1 - p(doom)
@NivlacM That's a good question. My immediate thought is that cryonics rates in the current population seem too low for that to meaningfully affect the resolution of this question, though they could indeed rise. My tentative proposal is to count cryonics as "still living" only if it was done at a time in which we're pretty sure it's going to work (if such a time comes), and not count the currently cryonically preserved people as still living.
But I think I'd like to see why exactly cryonics rates are rising so dramatically before making a judgment on whether it should count.