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

161–170 of 211 posts

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#161

Post by croes »

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…

Don’t forget this scenario:

The file with the life saving code, text, formula etc. can’t be read because the license server needed to get access doesn’t exist anymore

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#162

Post by nottorp »

FinnLobsien wrote: post #158
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.

> if we paid real-life things not as a subscription, but based on usage, like an API.

We used to do that before the push for subscriptions.

And in the digital world this is the micropayments dream...

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#163

Post by zaphirplane »

Legend2440 wrote: post #71
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...

Interesting. Luckily with that kind of energy you can do absolutely insane things, like build planet-sized sunshades or push the earth to a more distant orbit. These challenges can be engineered around.

Or planet wide air conditioning to cool down the earth

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#164

Post by bazoom42 »

jeffwass wrote: post #160
bazoom42 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Good point - only the tools of oppression really works in 1984, all consumer products are crap. It is suggested this is deliberate, but even that might be propaganda.

And apparently it is a common workplace injury to get ones arm caught in a novel-writing machine.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#165

Post by amanaplanacanal »

beeflet wrote: post #120
bccdee wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, at least proximately. If you walked up to anyone on the street and asked them, "should we help desperate people," they'd say yes. This isn't even controversial.

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…

Is providing better mental health care for people off the table?

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#166

Post by amanaplanacanal »

antasvara wrote: post #109
socalgal2 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Population is leveling off and dropping in some countries, This is a problem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ufmu1WD2TSk - AI is rapidly getting better. Not clear how good it gets, but if everything you do for money goes in and out over a wire, you're in trouble. Or, everything gets so abundant that we can actually have high UBI This reminds me if why I disliked to movie Elysium. They had a robots that effectively…

>I didn't buy the premise of the movie that only that rich would be able to use them. Given they were robots, governments, hospitals, could and would make them readily available since ultimately it would massively lower their medical costs. Given Big Pharma's current ability to get lots and lots of money for vital medicine, I'm not optimistic they'd price a theoretical medical machine low enough for a government to a…

Big pharma usually only gets big money until the patents run out. Today's expensive treatment is relatively cheap a generation from now.

I realize that sometimes there are situations where this doesn't hold.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#167

Post by palmotea »

> For example, the space-race of the 1950's and 60's, was driven by a spirit of optimism and excitement for humanity breaking free of the Earth to explore the solar system and beyond.

That was the era of better living through heavy industry. We were optimistic because we didn't understand the consequences of what we were doing. It's a lot easier to sell optimism when people aren't familiar with the cons of the kinds of things you're doing.

Re: We need more optimistic science fiction

#168

Post by amanaplanacanal »

bccdee wrote: post #117
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI, give me an optimistic sci fi plot for the world. > AI, now compare it to communism. Considering how every attempt of communism has turned out, this optimistic science fiction plot better turns out to be quite different from communism.

> Considering how every attempt of communism has turned out People make too much of ideology. "Communism" was the table stakes for getting the USSR to support your government during the 20th century, in the same way that "democracy" [1] was table stakes for US support. You can't really talk about "every attempt" at communism—it's mostly the story of a single superpower and its proxies. [1]: "Democracy" in quotes, bec…

I suspect some of it is the natural outcome of revolution. No matter how noble the cause, those who actually rule after the revolution are those who are willing to be the most ruthless in seizing and welding power.
Post reply on HN