From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Wed Feb 17 1999 - 12:12:11 MST
Jfvirey@aol.com writes:
> I must admit that in *Centuries*, Attanasio does not do the best job of
> capturing the superior intelligence of his metasapients, but then most authors
> usually have problems in representing more-than-human intelligence. Walter Jon
> Williams did a good job of it in *Aristoi*, as did Charles Sheffield in
> *Proteus*, but I know of few writers who succeeded. Any names?
I think Vinge did a nice job in A Fire Upon the Deep, but mostly
because he managed to keep the superintelligences off-stage and
cleverly suggested through various contrasts the difference between
human and superhuman intelligence. The prologue however describes a
Power directly.
Zindell has several superhumans in his books, although they tend to be
so quirky that it is hard to see the superintelligence behind their
games.
David Brin had some interesting descriptions of post-singularity
humans in his short story "Stones of significance" (not sure if it is
published).
John Barnes has perhaps the so far most vivid descriptions of
transhumanization in _Mother of Storms_ (I found myself jumping over
lots of sex, violence and bad weather to read more about the posthuman
subplot).
> Though I see nothing wrong in plots that pit heroes against villains, I don't
> think *Centuries* is reducible to this pattern. Attanasio does a very good job
> of presenting the motivations of the imploders, and though they may be
> considered as callous on a cosmic scale, I think Attanasio really manages to
> make them ambiguous, given that death is not final, that there is a
> multiplicity of universes, and that they are after eternal bliss itself,
This is the neat thing about the story: the philosophical situation is
non-trivial. You can really see the point of the imploders and
anti-imploders, and even the Kaliesque mother is in some sense right
(although hopelessly deluded). What I disliked was that Attanasio
fairly quickly took sides, and then allowed the hero to "save the day"
in a manner any superintelligence would have figured out in
nanoseconds (I certainly did, long before the plot got there). If I
had written it, I think I would have played up the dilemma further
instead.
> BTW, when I characterized "Inherit the Stars" as one of the worst novels on
> the Extropian reading list, I meant "Voyage to Yesteryear", which I found
> unreadable and totally devoid of dramatic interest. "Inherit the Stars", on
> the other hand, though not great literature, is a very pleasant mystery novel
> on the scale of a planetary system.
Yes, I liked it. It is pleasant in the same way as the movie _The
Andromeda Strain_ (based on Crichton's book): the plot and acting are
forgettable, but it really manages to show the scientific method in
action, a kind of xenomedical detective story (this movie likely
contributed to me becoming a scientist; when I saw it again recently I
was amazed to notice how many scenes and concepts had influenced me
deeply when I originally saw it as a small boy).
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:05 MST