6 ms·
> While I'm sure a chemistry exists that supports vertical scaling 1000x beyond our own, it's not unreasonable to speculate that such genetic chemistry could be
by enkid 6y ago
> While I'm sure a chemistry exists that supports vertical scaling 1000x beyond our own, it's not unreasonable to speculate that such genetic chemistry could be rare.
This is what I'm talking about. Your making an assumption and straight up saying it's an assumption, but not providing any evidence that this assumption is true. You make another analogy which may or may not apply. I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'm not saying that you're right. I'm saying there is no possible way any of us can know at this point.
- jjoonathan 6y agoThis entire field is speculative and nobody argued otherwise. Quite the opposite: I bent over backwards to redundantly state it over and over again. More than I should have, and now I'm beginning to wonder why I bothered if it didn't prevent me from being ignored. The "you can't prove it" objection must be checked at the door for the sake of keeping the speculation interesting. Nobody is arguing that you should walk through the door. It's probably more respectable to refuse, on the whole. Once you walk through the door, though, complaining about proof is a bit silly, like walking into a speakeasy, ordering a drink, and complaining that they have served you illegal alcohol. It's not wrong, but it's also not helpful.