I've lately thought that on Sun, 14 Mar 1999, J. R. Molloy wrote:
>Scott B. wrote,
>>Choose five people that you most wish would embrace the idea of cryonics
>>because they have a talent or a gift that the world can ill afford to lose.
>I can think of half a dozen people with a talent or a gift that the world
>can ill afford to lose, but they don't embrace the idea of cryonics because
>they don't want to require people (who may have other talents or gifts) to
>look after frozen cadavers. IOW, the very people who have talents or gifts
>that the world can ill afford to lose, do not endorse the idea of cryonics.
>If those people don't endorse cryonics, why should extropians?
These people that you are speaking of must be unfamiliar with the idea of automation, no? I mean, the only reason that people now look after frozen cadavers themselves is that there aren't enough people signing up to make it worth automating. BTW, calling them "cadavers" sorta begs the question, and betrays the assumption that these people are really dead, rather than revivable.
-- Wolfkin. email@example.com | Libertarian webhost? www.freedomspace.net On a visible but distant shore, a new image of man; The shape of his own future, now in his own hands.-- Johnny Clegg.