Re: [-empyre-] Forward from Chad at selectparks.net

[saul ostrow <so5@nyu.edu>]

Alan Sondheim wrote:
> 
> Isn't everything examined on terms which can be held up to dispute? Aren't
> all terms problematic? What is the foundation of the scrutiny?
> 
> The example of WMD doesn't hold (I'm ignoring the red herring here),
> because, within the bounds of what's taken as physical reality, there
> aren't any.
> 
aren't any what -- bounds, red herrings -- WMD?
Let us turn this question around what would be under scrutiny in a VR --
what would be the means of scrutiny --  how do we discover the rules and
perameters of the programer who is programming and ordering all that we
would respond to -- can we intervene or overwrite the program at its
base -- or does the Vr at that point crash 
as for all terms being in dispute in the pr no one seems to be able to
end that dispute by pulling the plug  nor so they seem to be able to
over write the program -- such disputes have consequences in the PR --
but in VR are merely mimetic