Newsgroups: alt.activism,sci.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.activism.d,talk.environment
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Rio and streetkids
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:12:36 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

This is a great example of why people shouldn't remove attribution
lines.  Kim, you are crediting Armond with my words in the first
sentence.

If you insist on eliminating attribution lines please

1.  Do it right
2.  Retain e-mail addres and other identifying information.  You may
remember Armond by his name.  I tend to remember by user name.

In article <1992Jul23.205540.23920@cco.caltech.edu> rkrii@cco.caltech.edu (Roberk Kim Rickenbrode II) writes:
>[...]

>{Armond} Nope.  The benefits are important enough that none of us care.

>{Me}  Perhaps, or maybe we have been so dehumanized that we really don't care,
>  regardless of any perceived benefits.  Let me pose it to you this way: if
>  I told you that specific members of your family are going to die in 
>  automobile accidents (or by secondary pollution effects), and
>  furthermore gave you the power to effect the future only by halting automobile
>  production, what would you do?

>{Friedman} I wouldn't believe you.  If I did then I would halt it.
>	 On the other hand, if you told me the truth - that I and virtually
>	everyone else I know has approximately a 1/1000 chance (50,000
>	autodeaths a year out of 250,000,000) of being killed by a car every
>	year and I have the power to effect the future only by halting auto
>	production I'd shrug and say "I accept the risk.  Virtually every
>	other American does. (How many people do you know who don't get in cars
>	becasue [sic] of safety concerns?)  Why should I interfere?"

>{Me}  Ridiculous, I know, but I think it's illustrative, in this manner.  The
>numbers we see on TV (200 die in plane crash; 100,000 die annually from
>lung cancer, etc) are just that: numbers.  We must always keep in mind that
>these are people, important in their own right, with family and friends.

>{Friedman} Sure.  And how many million die every year just from being born?
>Until we find the secret if [sic] immortality we can't live forever.

>  The dismissive "sure" above and the quote below lead me to think that my
>comments were misunderstood.  I am not against technology, I see the benefits;
>but, I also see the deleterious effects of its wanton application, also.  The
>original intent of my post was to remind the seemingly blase Armond that
>the annual mortality figures represent people, not abstractions.  That is all.

Fine.  But you still haven't explained why that should have any effect
on what we do.  And who's Armond?  

>[...]

>{Me}  In short, I reject MY inclusion in the "us" pronoun used above.

>{Friedman} So then why the heck are you using a computer?

>  The point of my statement was merely to say that some of us see the 
>figures in a little different light.

So what do you do about it besides moaning and groaning?

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Xref: sparky alt.activism:13301 talk.politics.misc:35402 alt.individualism:4451