XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.electronics.design
In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes. Yes I could.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Things. People will make things. All of the things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Great, yet another techno nerd weenie who spends way too much time
watching
>>>>>> Star Trek reruns.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Bless. It's almost as though you imagine anyone give even the tinest of
fucks
>>>>> what you think.
>>>>
>>>> It's almost as though you imagine I think puerile techno nerds represent
>>>> the average person.
>>>
>>> I think you need to find a better insult - "techno nerd" is a bit
tautologous -
>>> and I've never made any particular claim to represent anyone.
>>
>> How about pie-in-the-sky dreamer?
>>
>> Like I've said before, most people can't be bothered to make things as
>> trivial as bread and biscuits.
>
> Well, lots of people *do* make bread and biscuits; and a series about baking
was
> one of the most popular UK programs for some time.
Do you know the meaning of the word "most"?
> As I keep, apparently, having to explain - I am talking about *mature*
> fabrication technology - something capable of working with multiple
materials,
> and able to fabricate something at the push of a button more quickly than
> driving to buy it, and more cheaply.
In other words, a Star Trek replicator which doesn't exist and likely will
never exist.
--
Jim Pennino
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
