<<
My compliments to Natasha, as opposed to E. Russell, for her calmness in
this debate. But I'm afraid that here I have to agree with a literal
reading of Carwash: "making the extropians concepts ... LOOK like
scifi." Nanotech may not be scifi, but associating it with posters
showing people with skin of pure silicon may well cause people to think
of nanotech as pulp scifi. Johnny Carwash being an existence, although
not a frequency, proof.
Why would you want a silicon, or silicon-compound, skin anyway? If you
have that kind of tech, and want semiconductors in your skin, use
diamond circuitry. Much more useful would be diamondoid plates. Or
perhaps buckyhair. How does buckyfiber rate on the Kevlar scale? For
more decoration, artificial quartzes, corundum, or diamond, with
impurities in some particular pattern.
>>
I have not been even trying to be calm ( in fact i am quite pissed off about
the whole thing) and applaud Natasha for being so diplomatic. But the main
concern for artists here is that Extropians are being censored.
Are we only allowed to publish nonfiction now? Is sci fi not to be considered
Extropic? When did this occur? Who will decide what art is correct? IMO, it
should be the free market.
A good calm discussion would be lovely, redining and honing the artist's
ideas until they cwith more scientific realities... but that was not
apparently what Mr. Carwash" had intended, and Natasha quite obviously
returned the debate to that level. Your post, for example, is quite polite,
helpful, and suggestive. But the dirisive and insulting language that was
aimed at Natasha's piece ( which if anyone bothered to read tha post was
based on an image honoring her father) did not seem to be positive or
uplifting, it actually belittled and abused. She chose not to respond in that
manner.
Now he backtracks and says it was constructive, but let's try and not confuse
Natshasha's natural grace with the actual intent.