Well, hell, that's what I said. But you make it sound so much more _clear_. I don't remember who was saying that geodesic definition is based solely on local information, but that appears to be the major roadblock for our logic. If I could find out where this stipulation is coming from and figure out the necessary logical proofs, you could possibly have a water-tight buzzword. I don't believe I have ever heard one of those (the marketing favorite, "paradigm shift" is an excellent example of why buzzwords don't have to be logical anyway).
-----Original Message----- From: mmotyka@lsil.com [mailto:mmotyka@lsil.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 11:19 AM To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Geodesic Fractal Whatitz
Bob,
We *do* all trade with our neighbors so your term is only trouble when looking at the wrong part of the geometry. With trade the measure should not be based on physical space or network geometry, those are transient and permutable, rather the measure should be based on the proximity of the parties in terms of goods consumed, goods produced and pricing. The networks are not electrical or geographical they're economic. So while it does affect cost all this communication and transportation technology is only the physical layer.
Mike