From: gweasner@bcstec.ca.boeing.com   
      
   Just because someone can't tell the differences in something doesn't mean   
   they are not relevant. I think it would be more a lack of percision to   
   disinquise those differences. The understanding of those differences is   
   even more relevant. Note the abbility to have to make a simulation   
   instead of the   
   real thing. the purpose of a simulation is ussually to gain a better   
   understanding of the real thing and the dynamic such an entity has.   
      
   To clone the real thing or to make a modified real thing from the knowlege   
   gained by using the simulation is probably one of many valid reasons to   
   constructing a simulation.   
      
   Simulations are not perfect but more often far from ever coming close to   
   those things they simulate.   
      
   On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Jano wrote:   
      
   > joss dice...   
   >   
   > > If something behaves as a simulation which is perfect in every way, then I   
   > > believe it should be treated as if it were the object of its simulation. I   
   > > would treat a Nexus 6 exactly as I would treat a human :o)   
   >   
   > Isn't that more or less what Turing said with his test? I for one agree   
   > with you: if you can't tell the difference, the unknown differences   
   > aren't relevant.   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)