The point is not to stick to what's possible today, but rather to use the current science including speculative science and write fiction about that. At least if you're talking about hard SF. Why say "science" fiction if the science is completely whack?
Depends on what kind of science fiction you wish to write. Hard SF deals with science and technology as accurately as possible and the extrapolations and speculations should at least be within reach when it comes to current science.
Also, what's the point of making it completely fiction, if the word "science" is still in there somewhere? It doesn't get more scientific just because you throw in a few starships and rayguns. Sure, you could write about a universe with completely different laws of nature.
"Suppose you write a story around 2040 where cars don't fly. Suddenly in slashdot there's a story about flying cars to be appearing in 2030. Darn. You have to rewrite everything."
I have to disagree. We can have flying cars right now, the main problems seems to be safety and noise. Of course, maybe you write that story set in the 2040s and then the next day someone invents something that makes the flying cars silent and as safe as any other car. Your story will possibly be outdated, but when you wrote it, you extrapolated from the way things were and guessed how things would be. In the 1940's, who could ever have thought about small powerful computers on everyone's desk? When you speculate you can't expect to make 100% accurate predictions. You can however write about a possible outcome with the present as a base.
"Still, I find realistic sci-fi much more appealing than say, Startrek, because of the possibility of such future ACTUALLY happening. This has a very good potential."
Me too. To try and use science and speculate from it, doesn't mean the story have to be boring. If science has shown us anything, it's that the universe is fantastic.
"Now - the second problem is, the future might be much darker than we imagine. Suppose you write about a near future (2050) where ecology is rule #1. But recently on physorg I read that global warming cannot be stopped easily and that the current trend is that the planet will heat about 1 degree centigrate per year. This means that in the future there would be a scenario of overheated regions of the planet (i.e. deserts), something like Mad Max. Not exactly a post-nuclear wasteland, but certainly worrysome."
I agree that it's difficult to predict changes in policies and society. Arthur C Clarke had the Soviet Union still in existence in his books 2001 and 2010, for example. In Hammer of God, I believe it was, he mentioned that in the future there would be some sort of world-wide ban on weapons. I understand this is what he wants to happen, but sadly it seems to me to be very unrealistic.
Same thing with environmental issues as you mentioned. Maybe we will get our act together and try and develop more technologies that doesn't pollute our own home too much. Maybe we can find a way to slow down the global warming. Sometimes these things happen when you least expect it.
"So, the question is: How much realism do we want to impregnate our stories with, and how benevolent are we going to be with the future?
Well, there's got to be some degree of freedom. Besides these obstacles, writing a realistic story is very appealing, at least to me. I've been slowly losing interest for unrealistic sci-fi. Why? I know it's not real. There are no time portals, warp speeds, so I know this thing will NEVER EVER become real. So why think about something that will never happen but PRETENTS to be possible?"
Well, warp drive is not entirely out of the question, at least on a theoretical level. Take the Alcubierre drive, for example. Wormholes are also a theoretical possibility.
But, I am writing science fiction, just for fun really, and I try to be as realistic as possible. It's difficult when I try and invent a new kind of alien which is very exotic compared to us, when it comes to physiology, technology, society, philosophy, etc.. No, they're not humanoids...
"When Star Wars was created, I fantasized about all those things becoming real. (After all, that's the catch, isn't it?) Space travel was thought far-fetched, but NOT impossible. And this is what lets us dream.
Because, sci-fi and fantasy is about dreaming, isn't it?"
Absolutely. Sometimes the inventions depicted in SF become real in one way or another. Perhaps the engineers of today read a lot of SF yesterday.
I don't care if it's written by a nobody or not. That alone is not enough to judge whether it's good or bad. Reading it is a great way to decide if it's good or bad, something I wonder if/. editors did at all in this case.
Had a big open sandwich with lots of stuff on top, including a small mountain of potato salad. Lost grip of the whole thing, it fell up-side-down on the keyboard. It never really got completely clean after that.
Exactly. They should release all data for free, since it's paid for by the people. They should do it not only because it's the right thing to do, but also because they would get more respect and their popularity would go up. ESA is terrible as PR and informing the public. I bet more Europeans know more about NASA's projects than those of ESA.
And what about the hungry and homeless in Europe and USA? Do they have it easier and therefor don't need help, simply because they don't live in India?
Extraterritorial laws doesn't make sense. Actually, it's remerkably stupid. It should always be so that the laws of my country is what anyone, foreigner or not, must obey, and the same in any other country. That's why the age of consent is 15 over here no matter what it is in your country. Anything else is stupid, and therefor should not be implemented.
Who says that a universe needs a first cause? And to add a magical mythioal god is just to say "ok, we give up, let's make something up and call it a day". Why would anyone do that? Isn't it better to just say "we don't know, but maybe one day we will, and not thanks to religion anyway".
That's the beauty of religious texts. They were written way before humankind was even close to have this sort of knowledge, and yet educated adult people today honestly believe there is some sort of wisdom to gather from these texts - but only in hindsight of course. Before this new state of matter was discovered, water was probably interpreted as water. It's like Nostradamus' predictions that are confirmed only after something happened that someone think fits the prediction.
Slashdot Mirror
Then it shouldn't be called "science" fiction. The speculations should be based on real science.
The point is not to stick to what's possible today, but rather to use the current science including speculative science and write fiction about that. At least if you're talking about hard SF. Why say "science" fiction if the science is completely whack?
Also, what's the point of making it completely fiction, if the word "science" is still in there somewhere? It doesn't get more scientific just because you throw in a few starships and rayguns. Sure, you could write about a universe with completely different laws of nature.
Depends on how fast you're going, and how.
I have to disagree. We can have flying cars right now, the main problems seems to be safety and noise. Of course, maybe you write that story set in the 2040s and then the next day someone invents something that makes the flying cars silent and as safe as any other car. Your story will possibly be outdated, but when you wrote it, you extrapolated from the way things were and guessed how things would be. In the 1940's, who could ever have thought about small powerful computers on everyone's desk? When you speculate you can't expect to make 100% accurate predictions. You can however write about a possible outcome with the present as a base.
"Still, I find realistic sci-fi much more appealing than say, Startrek, because of the possibility of such future ACTUALLY happening. This has a very good potential."
Me too. To try and use science and speculate from it, doesn't mean the story have to be boring. If science has shown us anything, it's that the universe is fantastic.
"Now - the second problem is, the future might be much darker than we imagine. Suppose you write about a near future (2050) where ecology is rule #1. But recently on physorg I read that global warming cannot be stopped easily and that the current trend is that the planet will heat about 1 degree centigrate per year. This means that in the future there would be a scenario of overheated regions of the planet (i.e. deserts), something like Mad Max. Not exactly a post-nuclear wasteland, but certainly worrysome."
I agree that it's difficult to predict changes in policies and society. Arthur C Clarke had the Soviet Union still in existence in his books 2001 and 2010, for example. In Hammer of God, I believe it was, he mentioned that in the future there would be some sort of world-wide ban on weapons. I understand this is what he wants to happen, but sadly it seems to me to be very unrealistic.
Same thing with environmental issues as you mentioned. Maybe we will get our act together and try and develop more technologies that doesn't pollute our own home too much. Maybe we can find a way to slow down the global warming. Sometimes these things happen when you least expect it.
"So, the question is: How much realism do we want to impregnate our stories with, and how benevolent are we going to be with the future? Well, there's got to be some degree of freedom. Besides these obstacles, writing a realistic story is very appealing, at least to me. I've been slowly losing interest for unrealistic sci-fi. Why? I know it's not real. There are no time portals, warp speeds, so I know this thing will NEVER EVER become real. So why think about something that will never happen but PRETENTS to be possible?"
Well, warp drive is not entirely out of the question, at least on a theoretical level. Take the Alcubierre drive, for example. Wormholes are also a theoretical possibility.
But, I am writing science fiction, just for fun really, and I try to be as realistic as possible. It's difficult when I try and invent a new kind of alien which is very exotic compared to us, when it comes to physiology, technology, society, philosophy, etc.. No, they're not humanoids...
"When Star Wars was created, I fantasized about all those things becoming real. (After all, that's the catch, isn't it?) Space travel was thought far-fetched, but NOT impossible. And this is what lets us dream. Because, sci-fi and fantasy is about dreaming, isn't it?"
Absolutely. Sometimes the inventions depicted in SF become real in one way or another. Perhaps the engineers of today read a lot of SF yesterday.
Yes the Bible contains all kinds of wisdom not found in actual reality.
Examples? We haven't found extraterrestrial life at all.
No, but ladies sharing their doritos.
I don't care if it's written by a nobody or not. That alone is not enough to judge whether it's good or bad. Reading it is a great way to decide if it's good or bad, something I wonder if /. editors did at all in this case.
Sounds like a few of the things I associate with paradise.
What Would John Ashcroft Do? Oh, the dilemma!
Rather it's about using windows for things that you are passionate about, your interests, hobbies and such.
Had a big open sandwich with lots of stuff on top, including a small mountain of potato salad. Lost grip of the whole thing, it fell up-side-down on the keyboard. It never really got completely clean after that.
Apparently not!
Not Bill Gates. It's been pointed out so many times now that everyone knows it.
Perhaps we didn't bring out enough champagne?
It would be excellent if it was possible to somehow photograph individual rocks in the rings.
Exactly. They should release all data for free, since it's paid for by the people. They should do it not only because it's the right thing to do, but also because they would get more respect and their popularity would go up. ESA is terrible as PR and informing the public. I bet more Europeans know more about NASA's projects than those of ESA.
And what about the hungry and homeless in Europe and USA? Do they have it easier and therefor don't need help, simply because they don't live in India?
Exactly. How in the world is it possible to be so stupid to think that someone would honestly help him out in hacking their computer?
Extraterritorial laws doesn't make sense. Actually, it's remerkably stupid. It should always be so that the laws of my country is what anyone, foreigner or not, must obey, and the same in any other country. That's why the age of consent is 15 over here no matter what it is in your country. Anything else is stupid, and therefor should not be implemented.
Not at all. If they weren't in the USA when they did it, they didn't break US law at all.
Who says that a universe needs a first cause? And to add a magical mythioal god is just to say "ok, we give up, let's make something up and call it a day". Why would anyone do that? Isn't it better to just say "we don't know, but maybe one day we will, and not thanks to religion anyway".
That's the beauty of religious texts. They were written way before humankind was even close to have this sort of knowledge, and yet educated adult people today honestly believe there is some sort of wisdom to gather from these texts - but only in hindsight of course. Before this new state of matter was discovered, water was probably interpreted as water. It's like Nostradamus' predictions that are confirmed only after something happened that someone think fits the prediction.