The first! (And not the second). I’m not 100% sure if ‘subsidising billionaires’ is the correct term but I mean that money donated towards aging is probably going to be donated by billionaires anyway.
Yes you’re right, now that I think about Harrison’s comment, I think both a) “the industry is already/now getting lots of money from billionaires, so the marginal value of donating additional money is smaller” and b) donating money to anti-ageing research will lead to billionaires donating less money to anti-ageing research.
The first! (And not the second). I’m not 100% sure if ‘subsidising billionaires’ is the correct term but I mean that money donated towards aging is probably going to be donated by billionaires anyway.
“Subsidising billionaires” seems to imply the second interpretation.
This also seems to suggest the second interpretation.
Yes you’re right, now that I think about Harrison’s comment, I think both a) “the industry is already/now getting lots of money from billionaires, so the marginal value of donating additional money is smaller” and b) donating money to anti-ageing research will lead to billionaires donating less money to anti-ageing research.