pantryslut | (no subject)

(no subject)

1. Reading an SF book this week, I was struck by this question: why is there no dust in the future? I am talking about shiny post-industrial futures, of course, not post-apocalyptic futures, where there is plenty of dust. Thanks to G. for pointing out the distinction. G. has also already pointed up the handwave solution of self-replicating nanobots who feed themselves on dust particles. But still.

2. In regards to Deborah Jeane Palfrey, I am choosing the path of total denial and telling myself the Thelma and Louise version of her story. That is, clearly she faked her own death and has now run off to Mexico.

Threaded | Flat

In re #1, if you assume there is no dust just because it's not mentioned, then nobody ever takes a crap either! etc. I must be missing something.

I think Bruce Sterling had cockroaches in the space ships that would eat all the flakes of skin that normally make up dust.

Related to nothing, I was reading a book yesterday and the phrase "the intersection of tea and gay porn" leapt off the page and made me think of you.

I think it's in Delany's Nova where he makes a point of the characters walking around with dirty bare feet and the spaceship floors being all cruddy. He says something about how people stopped worrying about germs because of modern medicine, but I kind of thought that might just be a rationalization because there was something a little fetishy about the descriptions.

Heinlein did it way back in the 50's, in some short story about a couple who live on the moon, and she comments that her white dress never gets dirty because of the wonderful air filtering.

Me, I'm always wondering who maintains the systems that run those giant cities or whathaveyou.

Threaded | Flat