From: Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de
Date: Wed May 16 2001 - 02:16:07 MDT
Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> Define long-term, in a practical sense. Is 500 years too soon for Star Trek
> level technology, 5000 years, 50,000 years, or 5 million? There are
Star Dreck technology? A curious mix of magic physics and retro.
Superluminal travel, but no automation in battle. Monkeys
frozen in slowtime as flies encased in amber. No telepresence.
No augmented reality. No robotics. Antiquated communication
technology, yet no relativistic lag. Almost bare-handed
handling of antimatter. Nanotechnology, but still people
around. Nanotechnology, but ridiculously stupid, brittle
computers. Moronic SOPs. Inconsistent treatment of existing
technologies. Random regression from one episode to another.
Here today, and gone tomorrow, substituted by another shiny
bauble.
Instances of magic physics: forcefield, traktor beam, superluminal
drive, transporter. Hints that apparent limitations of physical
laws are just applicable to beginner civilizations (superciv
trickster figure Q).
Diagnosis: not a technology forecast but just space opera
for monkeys. Doing lots of harm by scrambling (especially
young) people's expectations of what is physically possible,
and what is not, what is easy, and what is hard.
Recommendation: Producers of the series to be the first
to be put up against the wall, come the revolution.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:40 MST