Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#21

Post by grzm »

rexreed wrote: post #10

Sorry but this is total bunk. Moving an object the size of a grain of rice with sound waves is not a tractor beam. And I can go on and on. If I want this sort of crap, I'll check my Facebook feed.

I wonder what the decisions look like in the editorial room. Is there some staff member sneaking this in to appear like they're doing work and there's not that much oversight? Do they say we need filler? Something that will get impressions? The Features & Analysis sidebar includes the following compelling titles:

- 100 Women 2016: Big names, astonishing untold stories: Find out who is on the list

- Extremist in the family: He bought his mum a diamond necklace — then fled to join IS

- Clock watching: The global business that starts every day at 9.06am precisely

- Boudoir in the Holy Land: Why Orthodox Jewish women are embracing glamour shoots (replete with shot of the back of a topless woman)

- Parental alienation: 'I was manipulated by my father'

- Tata crisis: How do you sack a boss who won't go?

and three more. I have a hard time distinguishing between the Features and Analysis pieces…

To their credit, none of the articles start with "This", is obviously a listicle, or promises a "weird tip".

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#22

Post by drzaiusapelord »

rexreed wrote: post #10

Sorry but this is total bunk. Moving an object the size of a grain of rice with sound waves is not a tractor beam. And I can go on and on. If I want this sort of crap, I'll check my Facebook feed.

Worse, the level of technical description in sci-fi, even in 'hard' sci-fi, is terribly low. You really can't say a submarine 'powered by the sun' is the same as predicting electric subs and neither do you get credit for such things unless you really delve into the justifications for such a 'prediction' and explain a fair degree on how it would all work. Or that the communicators in star trek have anything to do with smartphones and other low-effort comparisons.

Double worse, ignoring the cherry-picking sci-fi tends to do a very poor job predicting anything. Its almost as if sci-fi is written to be dramatic and follow the rules of storytelling instead of some weird futurist exercise. I doubt Philip K Dick gave two shits about how realistic or futuristic his settings were. He was too focused on the characters and the story.

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#23

Post by orjan »

saiya-jin wrote: post #20
mtw wrote: post #6

Jules Verne wrote about electrical submarines (Nautilus in 20,000 leagues under the sea), tasers, newscasts and videoconferencing, all became reality

apart from, you know, being 20,000 leagues under the sea, which is 1.1112e+8 metres accoridng to google. and submarines so deep in the ocean that they are actually deep in the space on the other side... or maybe it's just ISS?

I'll just quote Wikipedia:

"The title refers to the distance traveled while under the sea and not to a depth, as 20,000 leagues is over six times the diameter, and nearly twice the circumference of the Earth.[2] The greatest depth mentioned in the book is four leagues. The book uses metric leagues, which are four kilometres each"

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Thousand_Leagues_Under_...)

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#25

Post by Xophmeister »

adrianN wrote: post #14
mtw wrote: post #6

Jules Verne wrote about electrical submarines (Nautilus in 20,000 leagues under the sea), tasers, newscasts and videoconferencing, all became reality

The Nautilus is powered "by the same power as the sun", so you could argue that it is a nuclear submarine.

A nuclear fusion submarine, no less...so still not there yet!

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#27

Post by rmc »

grzm wrote: post #21
rexreed wrote: post #10

Sorry but this is total bunk. Moving an object the size of a grain of rice with sound waves is not a tractor beam. And I can go on and on. If I want this sort of crap, I'll check my Facebook feed.

I wonder what the decisions look like in the editorial room. Is there some staff member sneaking this in to appear like they're doing work and there's not that much oversight? Do they say we need filler? Something that will get impressions? The Features & Analysis sidebar includes the following compelling titles: - 100 Women 2016: Big names, astonishing untold stories: Find out who is on the list - Extremist in the f…

> - 100 Women 2016: Big names, astonishing untold stories: Find out who is on the list

That's actually an annual award/list thing from the BBC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Women_(BBC)

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#29

Post by notahacker »

orjan wrote: post #23
saiya-jin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

apart from, you know, being 20,000 leagues under the sea, which is 1.1112e+8 metres accoridng to google. and submarines so deep in the ocean that they are actually deep in the space on the other side... or maybe it's just ISS?

I'll just quote Wikipedia: "The title refers to the distance traveled while under the sea and not to a depth, as 20,000 leagues is over six times the diameter, and nearly twice the circumference of the Earth.[2] The greatest depth mentioned in the book is four leagues. The book uses metric leagues, which are four kilometres each" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Thousand_Leagues_Under_... )

Of course, if we're being pedantic about details, that still puts the depth the Nautilus reached at over a kilometre into the earth's crust below even the deepest part of the known ocean...

Re: Science fact: Sci-fi inventions that became reality

#30

Post by ocschwar »

notahacker wrote: post #29
orjan wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just quote Wikipedia: "The title refers to the distance traveled while under the sea and not to a depth, as 20,000 leagues is over six times the diameter, and nearly twice the circumference of the Earth.[2] The greatest depth mentioned in the book is four leagues. The book uses metric leagues, which are four kilometres each" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Thousand_Leagues_Under_... )

Of course, if we're being pedantic about details, that still puts the depth the Nautilus reached at over a kilometre into the earth's crust below even the deepest part of the known ocean...

Let's be kind to Verne. He did not know the depth of the Marianas trench.
Post reply on HN