-------------

as for antagonizing me against investment, stating this is money that is going out of the country, and because i am refusing a position in the U.S senate...

is that what it is? why does any decisions change as my choices become clear?

it's always been this way, with anyone in business. what must be focused fairly, is in return on investment. not aiming at the individual as the target.

besides the rewards and my shares, money stays in the States. why i'm singled out essentially because of envy, though they will state otherwise, is out of the practice of fair give and take.

money is involved in this scale, because return is expected to be. benefit is expected to be.

focus on the exchange, the potential of it all. and the good it will do for people.

 

 ------------

Feasibility is not the issue, but our rights in preservation. Existence.

But to entertain your doubts.

I will say it again.

If a single drop of blood holds the genetic chain to re-create an entire person,

no matter which structural information is lost, it can be reconstructed.

That is, speaking strictly functional damage. Perhaps not entirely memories. Though that can also be maximized of probbabilities.

If to argue whether nanotech and A.I will exist in the future to be able to carry and place atoms at will. Alongside many roadblocks...

Nobody is qualified to judge the future.

And to an extent, it is already here in primitive stages.

Just stop. It is not in your place.

Stop creating doubt. Nobody is qualified.