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

We need more optimistic science fiction

craig-russell.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 211 posts

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#151

Post by IAmBroom »

gcanyon wrote: post #54
AIPedant wrote: post #6

On Twitter, Colin Fraser pointed out that Black Mirror was somewhat optimistic in that the horrible evil technology actually works as described[1]. Truly pessimistic science fiction would have - people worshipping an AI God which is demonstrably dumber than a dog - friendly humanoid robots which don't really understand how to walk down a flight of stairs - gravitational warp drives which are purely cosmetic and canno…

There is a science fiction story, I don’t remember who wrote it or the title, where humanity discovers a way to modify the speed of light within a region. Excited, they work incredibly hard to implement the technology, only to discover they can only make it slower. Maybe it was jumping to a parallel universe to travel and then jumping back. But the same issue: the limit was lower.

Well, since light travels slower in non-vacuum space, like air or water or glass, I'd say we've already discovered that.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#152

Post by IAmBroom »

m463 wrote: post #118
nathan_compton wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Greg Egan writes very optimistic science fiction that only really does 2 sort of. Exceeding the speed of light is, from my point of view, so absurd a premise as to make me feel that any hard science fiction which tries to get around it is not serious. Its not that I can't enjoy that kind of science fiction, its just I can't take it seriously as having anything to do with actually reckoning with our position i…

Without exceeding the speed of light, "Universe Big"... and universe too far away to explore. :( I guess we could have a story set it the far far (far!) future...

"This is exciting! If I live to be 70 I'll get to hear the response from the question my great-grandfather's generation sent to Omega-5!"

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#153

Post by IAmBroom »

6510 wrote: post #125
armchairhacker wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Our lived reality today is that we already know the technical solutions to many tough problems (hunger, homelessness, many diseases, overpopulation, climate change, war) but simply refuse to apply them. Do we? We can do a lot for individuals, but even with cooperation, maybe can’t immediately give food and shelter to everyone, let alone fix climate change (war is fixable with cooperation, but unless I’m mistaken a…

> We can do a lot for individuals, but even with cooperation, maybe can’t immediately give food and shelter to everyone It oddly isn't all that desirable. You don't want to depend entirely on the generosity of others. What you want is a fighting chance to take care of yourself. Helping there, even a little bit is both very effective and very easy.

> You don't want to depend entirely on the generosity of others.

Spoken like someone who knows they'll eat today.

End game, yes, everyone needs a degree of autonomy. But there are plenty of families in Palestine and Ukraine and Nigeria that just need food, today.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#154

Post by IAmBroom »

hoseja wrote: post #129
snowwrestler wrote: post #48

Optimistic science fiction shows humanity applying unique ingenuity to solve tough problems. Our lived reality today is that we already know the technical solutions to many tough problems (hunger, homelessness, many diseases, overpopulation, climate change, war) but simply refuse to apply them. Of course people don’t believe optimistic sci-fi anymore. Star Trek the original series is usually taken as an example of op…

> (hunger, homelessness, many diseases, overpopulation, climate change, war) This is a profoundly, even comically, contradictory set. You cannot actually "solve" any half of these without causing the other half.

How would access to food and freedom from hunger, sickness, and homelessness cause war and climate change? We already have enough food; it's poorly distributed. Medicinal challenges aren't solved with substantially more energy; they're solved with more information. Housing: plenty of room on this planet, just not situated between your San Fran tech job and the mall.

War and climate change are not caused by full bellies and healthy spleens, as you claim.

Overpopulation is the last problem to solve, and reproduction trends downwards in affluent, well-educated countries. So, possibly even that is solved by these three benefits.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#155

Post by IAmBroom »

hoseja wrote: post #140
bccdee wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will you steal from me to help them? Oh, like Robin Hood? I assume you're talking about taxes, but even literal theft in this context is the stuff of heroic folktales.

Huh? If you wanna go there by the way, Robin Hood stole from tax collectors even in the embellished fairytale. Also Lionheart was a bad king, away on vain adventure.

Stay on topic. We aren't discussing minutia of English kingship.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#156

Post by IAmBroom »

6510 wrote: post #126
beeflet wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not opposed to helping homeless people, I'm opposed to this idea that humanity's main purpose is essentially to harbor as many people as possible who have no agency. I think that we should have greater goals far beyond that. Art, science, exploration. I don't know, take your pick. Thanks to GMOs and the industrial revolution we have more food than any point other point in history. Almost no one works in agricult…

You never hear people talk about what slavery did for homelessness. One can be quite deranged, if a mean and a bed are provided and we beat you with a stick you are motivated to do the manual labor. It is also a sound method to overcome addiction. If pampered people living the good life cant quit smoking, stop drinking, cant quit Valium, cant stop eating. What would it be like to wake up under the bridge with an empt…

Fortunately that choice is pure fiction.

No one has ever solved addiction with slavery, as you suggest. Just the opposite: many addicts have been forced by their addiction and circumstances into sex work, and some abducted sex slaves have been forced into addiction to control them.

You seem to have a rich fantasy about what life is like for the impoverished and addicted.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#157

Post by ben_w »

hoseja wrote: post #128
ben_w wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at even just 4%, the thermal emissions from a partial Dyson swarm would still be enough to heat Earth by twice what anthropogenic climate change has managed so far: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092702482...

"anthropogenic climate change" isn't heating the planet by literally heating it up with joules from burning stuff but by shifting the balance between absorbed and radiated heat from the sun.

Yes, and?

The same is the case with the Dyson swarm. Space goes from being empty to partially re-emitting as a warm object in our direction.

The joule heating from current human power is negligible; conversely, a 4% partial Dyson swarm directly heating the earth (i.e. not just greenhousing Sol) wouldn't be just +3 K change in equilibrium, it would be something like +24,400 K, which would vapourise and gravitationally unbind the planet.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#158

Post by FinnLobsien »

nottorp wrote: post #147

Hmm I could argue that Philip Dick's doors that demand payment to open are a good pessimistic prediction of the current entshittification.

I do think it's a genuinely interesting speculation—what happens if we paid real-life things not as a subscription, but based on usage, like an API.

Not advocating for that at all, but it makes me want to read Ubik or write a short story about how it would affect life.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#159

Post by nathan_compton »

IAmBroom wrote: post #152
m463 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without exceeding the speed of light, "Universe Big"... and universe too far away to explore. :( I guess we could have a story set it the far far (far!) future...

"This is exciting! If I live to be 70 I'll get to hear the response from the question my great-grandfather's generation sent to Omega-5!"

Life extension sort of solves this problem and is much more plausible.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#160

Post by jeffwass »

bazoom42 wrote: post #127
AIPedant wrote: post #6

On Twitter, Colin Fraser pointed out that Black Mirror was somewhat optimistic in that the horrible evil technology actually works as described[1]. Truly pessimistic science fiction would have - people worshipping an AI God which is demonstrably dumber than a dog - friendly humanoid robots which don't really understand how to walk down a flight of stairs - gravitational warp drives which are purely cosmetic and canno…

The movie Brazil is a take on 1984 where the technology does not work very well. The thought police is not all-seeing but quite inept (although just as brutal). The plot is set off by an actual bug getting caught in a typing macine evetually causing the wrong guy to get arrested. The rebel hero is a rogue plumber who actually fixes things which are broken.

One note - in the 1984 novel the technology (or at least the product quality) didn’t work very well either. Eg the “victory” cigarettes that fall apart, or terrible coffee with a daily allocated saccharin pill.
Post reply on HN