Re: Re: starship-design: The Way ahead & Bugs

[KellySt@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/19/98 7:27:26 AM, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl wrote:

>> >However, what Kelly proposes above are not suicide missions,
>> >but "kill'em missions" - we send them convinced that they will
>> >safely return, but upon their returning, when something does not 
>> >go to our liking, we simply do not turn on the decel beam, 
>> >and let them perish in space.
>> >Somehow, when they are willing to sacrifice their lives voluntarily,
>> >it is abhorrent to Kelly, but when WE willingly cause them 
>> >to perish in space, it is OK.
>> >Probably, you know, it is the matter of who rules here?
>> 
>> I one case we ask for people to volenteer to risk us having to kill them to
>> protect Earth from potentially devastating plagues. In the other we ask for
>> volunteers to die for buracratic convenence.  
>>
>Bureaucratic convenience? How come?
>Kelly, you are next to impossible at times... ;-))

To save the money or time nessisary to work up a two way mission.  Staying
longer has little other benifit.


>> Big morality issue difference.
>> 
>Oh, yes. In favor of my one-way missions...  

I what sence?


>-- Zenon

Kelly