  Byrne and Hall (1999) criticized the argument of Chalmers (1996) in favor of
the Everett-style interpretation. They claimed to show ``the deep and
underappreciated flaw in ANY Everett-style interpretation''. I will argue that
it is possible to interpret Chalmers's writing in such a way that most of the
criticism by Byrne and Hall does not apply. In any case their general criticism
of the many-worlds interpretation is unfounded. The recent recognition that the
Everett-style interpretations are good (if not the best) interpretations of
quantum mechanics has, therefore, not been negated.
