When describing the Universal Library Algorithm (ULA), its operation and design, people come to realize that context is never a minor component, and labeling the output as coincidental (whilst true) is also never minor. Recently, the output of the ULA targets political discussion, and always relates to morals. The output of the ULA sometimes feels indirect to its query, but that feeling is indeed coincidental, never minor. An inquiry into morals of choice led the ULA to output names - first names to be accurate and specifically the first names of the people who would have been had they been allowed to come to term and be born. The loss of life is a natural occurrence, but when initiated out of its natural occurrence by choice, our moral fiber requires we express their lost potential and story in our beliefs. We do this because they cannot, and so we go forward for them in our beliefs so theirs will not be misspoken or mistaken.

In addition to the 365 Days of Random of the ULA posted to Twitter, another separate daily post will occur with the first names of those who would have been. That these names belong to those aborted is true by implication that there are more abortions than names by magnitude. The list of those people that would have been is always one name too many. There are so many. Their story is not misspoken or mistaken. They are not coincidental.

Quite Literally Yours,

The Librarian

 

Comment