'Doomed' multitudes

Chris · 05 Apr 2005, 17:53 · from 2005-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: rasputin_ at hotmail.com (Chris)
Date: Tue Apr  5 17:53:13 2005
Subject: (urth) 'Doomed' multitudes
In-Reply-To: <42532E40.5070509 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY102-F21EA6510ABE9959017A65D863D0 at phx.gbl>

That's actually not a difficult question at all; in fact it *seems* so 
obvious how he "can say" it that I won't bother to try to answer it. Instead 
I'll ask a more productive question:

Why are you using "worlds" as a unit of measurement instead of individual 
human lives?

Related: What kind of perspective would it require to make this a valid way 
to measure?

To bake a cake for six people: put two containers full of the relevant 
ingredients into one container, and process appropriately. Separate contents 
into six containers and serve.

Maru said:
>Please explain to me how you can say that N worlds of people (where N 
>represents the totality
>of worlds colonized by man, including a revitalized Urth/Ushas) could 
>possibly only
>equal or be less (!) than N-1 worlds of people.
>
>~Maru
>_______________________________________________
>Urth Mailing List
>To post, write urth at urth.net
>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net