←back to thread

170 points bookofjoe | 10 comments | | HN request time: 0.411s | source | bottom
1. palmotea ◴[] No.43647496[source]
I wouldn't put too much stock in this. Asimov was a fantasy writer telling fictional stories about the future. He was good at it, which is why you listen and why it's enjoyable, but it's still all a fantasy.
replies(4): >>43647575 #>>43647923 #>>43648860 #>>43648920 #
2. timewizard ◴[] No.43647575[source]
There's also Frank Herbert. Who saw AI as ruinous to humanity and it's evolution and saw a future where humanity had to fight a war against it resulting in it being banished from the entire universe.
replies(2): >>43647785 #>>43648868 #
3. palmotea ◴[] No.43647785[source]
> There's also Frank Herbert. Who saw AI as ruinous to humanity and it's evolution and saw a future where humanity had to fight a war against it resulting in it being banished from the entire universe.

Did he though? Or was the Butlerian Jihad backstory whose function was allow him to believably center human characters in his stories, given sci-fi expectations of the time?

I like Herbert's work, but ultimately he (and Asimov) were producers of stories to entertain people, so entertainment always would take priority over truth (and then there's the entirely different problem of accurately predicting the future).

replies(1): >>43648817 #
4. MetaWhirledPeas ◴[] No.43647923[source]
> I wouldn't put too much stock in this. Asimov was a fantasy writer telling fictional stories about the future.

Why not? Who is this technology expert with flawless predictions? Talking about the future is inherently an exercise of the imagination, which is also what fiction writing is.

And nothing he's saying here contradicts our observations of AI up to this point. AI artwork has gotten good at copying the styles of humans, but it hasn't created any new styles that are at all compelling. So leave that to the humans. The same with writing; AI does a good job at mimicking existing writing styles, but has yet to demonstrate the ability to write anything that dazzles us with its originality. So his prediction is exactly right: AI does work that is really an insult to the complex human brain.

5. tehjoker ◴[] No.43648817{3}[source]
I think this is kind of misunderstanding scifi a bit. You're right it was designed to be entertaining, but the kernel of it is that they take some existing trend and extrapolate it into the future. Do that enough times, and some of the stories will start to be meaningful looking backwards and the people who made those predictions still deserve credit even if they weren't entirely useful in the forward direction.
6. triceratops ◴[] No.43648860[source]
> Asimov was a fantasy writer

Asimov was mostly not a fantasy writer. He was a science writer and professor of biochemistry. He published over 500 books. I didn't feel like counting but half or more of them are about science. Maybe 20% are science fiction and fantasy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov_bibliography_(cat...

replies(1): >>43651536 #
7. triceratops ◴[] No.43648868[source]
I always thought the Butlerian Jihad was a convenient way to remove AI as a plot element. Same thing with shields and explosions; it made swordfighting a plausible way to fight in a universe with faster-than-light travel.
8. calmbell ◴[] No.43648920[source]
A fantasy writer telling fictional stories about the future is more credible than many so-called serious people (think Marc Andreessen) who promote any technology as the bee's knees if it can make them money.
replies(1): >>43650137 #
9. palmotea ◴[] No.43650137[source]
> A fantasy writer telling fictional stories about the future is more credible than many so-called serious people (think Marc Andreessen) who promote any technology as the bee's knees if it can make them money.

But that's more a knock on people like Marc Andreessen than a reason you should put stock in Asimov.

10. staticman2 ◴[] No.43651536[source]
Asimov was not savy at computers and found it difficult to learn to use a word processor.