Here's what I think I've figured out so far...
The Blind in "Blind to Life" —
The "1969 ASCII standard" refers to Braille ASCII (or, more formally, The North American Braille ASCII Code). It was developed around 1969 and, despite originally being known as North American Braille ASCII, it is now used internationally.
Frustratingly enough, I wasn't able to find a single online tool capable of accepting Braille ASCII and doing anything meaningful with it. As it turns out, though, unless I'm way off base here that doesn't even matter: the responses don't appear to be meaningful Braille ASCII encoded text.
The simplest response, #3, begins with the code +. According to what I found, this translates as "ing" in Grade 2 Braile, but contextually must be a suffix. The one decent text-to-Braille tool I found won't code "ing" that way unless it follows something. So + shouldn't be at the start of a message. The rest of response 3 isn't even letters; it's all symbols - quotes and a dash - even in Braille.
None of the other responses fair any better. They all yield gibberish when parsed as text.
That leads me to the other idea I had when I first looked at this.
The Life in "Blind to Life" —
My very first assumption was that this was about John Conway's Game of Life. I thought perhaps the 1969 ASCII Standard was some way of encoding in ASCII the state of a board for Life or some similar cellular automata system. But Life wasn't big until 1970, and I couldn't find anything relevant that would require the digits, letters and symbols we see in the responses to describe.
So if the responses aren't Braille messages, and aren't Life boards, what if they're both? Life only cares about off or on per cell. "Blind to Life" might be encoding Life patterns using the off/on of Braille dots! We have to go from Braille to Life to decode them!
Applying my first idea to the responses gives what I provide below, to the best of my ability. It may be that looking at them in light of my second idea will be meaningful to someone; I know there are types of constructs that have names, but so far I can only positively identify one answer, and have a decent guess at another.
Question 1: I am blind to Life.
This is a Gosper glider gun.
Its category is Glider Guns.
I don't see a good way to relate this to the question. (Though it might fit Question 2, oddly enough)
Question 2: I leave the dead in my wake.
This is puffer 2, an "extremely dirty puffer" (meaning it leaves a lot of still - aka dead - lives and oscillators behind).
This goes under the category puffers (Maybe it's something else?)
Question 3: I have lived for many generations.
This is the pattern called an acorn.
It's a pattern in the category Methuselahs.
Methuselahs are patterns that take many generations to finally stabilize, and are an allusion to the biblical Methuselah who lived 969 years.
Question 4: None shall come before me.
This looks a lot like Garden of Eden 5. Gardens of Eden are ones that have no predecessor (a state that evolves into it), so there are none before it. It goes under the category Garden of Eden. (It's probably something else, but...)
(This wasn't fully decoded by the tools I have to work with, so the pattern is slightly wrong. I didn't find any patterns that were particularly close to this.)
———Question / Response 5————————————————————
Question 5: What am I?
Response 5: We're told this is an acronym of the first letters of the
namescategories (Hint 1) for Responses 1-4.
So far, we have
G P M G (what?)
Note to OP: I don't think Response 3 would work out exactly to what it did by complete coincidence, so I will be rather surprised if my ideas thus far are not correct. Given this, either I've been decidedly unlucky in finding good tools online to pursue this puzzle, or possibly you're unaware of how hard it is to convert backwards without a lot of manual and very error-prone effort. I suspect this puzzle is a good bit harder than you thought it would be.