I asked about Egypt specifically and the rise and fall of empires in general, but apparently that was "not the same thing".

civilization advancing, stagnating, and regressing is not the same as civilization advancing, stagnating, and regressing.

his main stumbling block was that there was still birth control that he understood 200 years in the future.

he said there shouldn't be any pills anymore, because there's no way there would still be pills in the future.

I was like well there were pills 200 years ago from today.

but apparently "that's not the same thing".

so similar medical technology existing 200 years apart is not the same as similar medical technology existing 200 years apart.

and I was like maybe they put all their innovation into creating new materials for spaceships and they had a ain't broke don't fix it attitude toward birth control.

He's like yeah, but there's no way that any sort of technology like that could ever really go backwards.

and I had just watched this video about this specific diaphanous fiber weave that was like the most popular and technically advanced weave of all time that only the wealthy Romans wore, and it was due to a specific weaving technology for these super delicate fragile fibers, and that technology was not funded as rome went bankrupt and then was gradually forgotten and lost for centuries as the local weavers died out and didn't pass on their knowledge, so instead of some insane thread count, the leading weaving expert from that region of the world today can still only match like 30% of the thread count with modern technology and techniques.

and he was like "that's not the same thing".

so technology going backwards is not the same as technology going backwards.

how dull and bewildering an exchange that was.

but riveting to read and write about!