Re: ply to Grant

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 14:30:04 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "Re: Words and memes"

    Received: by id OAA21502 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:35:46 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <>
    Subject: Re: ply to Grant
    Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 06:30:04 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2002 14:30:05.0026 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4E24C20:01C1AF1A]
    Precedence: bulk

    >At 07:18 AM 5/02/02 -0800, you wrote:
    > >So, yes, the engineering of cultural change IS worth billions to both the
    > >individuals who do the engineering and to the populations that adopt his
    > >ideas.
    > >
    > >Grant
    > >
    >Is this about the survival of the fittest or the fattest Grant. What about
    >intergenerational equity?
    I thought we were applying the survival of the fittest to the memes here,
    not people we like or dislike. And what's intergeneraltional equity got to
    do with whether a new technology makes money or not? I don't even know what
    you mean by intergenerational equity. Are you talking about generations of
    memes or generations of people? And what kind of equity? Equity between
    what and what? The culture of Henry Ford's manufacturing process has
    certainly survived for several generations of both humans and memes. That
    of Bill Gates looks to keep going while many others drop by the wayside. So
    I'm not sure what your question was meant to imply.


    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 14:44:39 GMT