Stewart Brand wrote:
>
> At 7:20 PM +0000 1/16/01, Russell Whitaker wrote:
> >It's encouraging that you're taking the time to respond
> >to statements forwarded to this list, so thanks, but...
> >all I'm asking of you is to disambiguate your statement
> >above, to assure that the inevitable disagreements
> >with it are disagreements with your _actual_ position.
>
> What might be the difference between a 22 year old 22-year-old and a
> 220 year old 22-year-old?
Well the first can't compete with the second except perhaps in naive
optimistic freshness. :-) And I would hope the 220 yr old 22-yr-old
has others of his/her age around. It is terribly boring being with
those with too much more limited experience and horizons constantly.
Ask me when I take a shot at it in another 175 years or so. NAW. I
would be real depressed if I couldn't find something more amusing to do
175 yrs from now.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:20 MDT