Writing About The Future - Page 5


Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 84

Thread: Writing About The Future

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    ... along with an almost-overwhelming compulsion to put the two together... it ain't human.
    G.D.
    That's quite dehumanising language - about 1% of the human population doesn't count as human in those terms: some 70 million people. Certainly seems to be part of the spectrum of human experience, though far from mainstream.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dluuni View Post
    Apparently the Y chromosome is disintegrating over time, and furthermore, that's normal....
    I don't know the details, but that view is hotly contended with a 50/50 split in the bio science community.


    Either way, seems there's plenty of fuel for a good far future sci-fi. How about an entirely sex/gender neutral branch of humanity that have founded some utopia. Until some freaks with male and female identities appear to cause trouble in paradise - not new though, Star Trek TNG covered this, but they left plenty of nuances unexplored.


    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    As for any sort of asexual reproduction, adaptability ends up being lost there, resulting in less chance for survival if conditions change.
    That's unlikely, even if we just limit it to biological reproduction - asexual species still exist after all. Then if we add technological reproduction into the mix it seems very unlikely. Adaptability is the consequence of a phenotype interacting with whatever environment it finds itself in. If we can choose the phenotype of our progeny then we are likely to choose one that increases the chances of survival to any given environment. A Chinese scientists already claims to have edited a baby to be immune to HIV, so it's not much of a stretch for a far future sci-fi for complete gene editing.

  2. #42
    Maybe in 10,000 years the world will have destroyed itself and there will only be cavemen intent on survival.







  3. #43
    Wɾ¡ʇ¡∩9 bdcharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    In a far-distant otherworld.
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by JustRob View Post
    Ah, my specialist subject, although my skill is in writing about the near future, i.e. my own living memory. In fact my future was so near that it is now my past and I am currently checking how much of it I got right. When one writes about the distant future beyond all living memory then the rules are different. H G Wells took the precaution of doing that in The Time Machine. Nobody could ever deny that his time traveller was right about such a distant future.

    The idea of being an inventor in the future must be a non-starter if necessity is the mother of invention because once all necessities have been met invention itself becomes unnecessary. Apparently sales of new smart-phones are already waning because the existing ones do pretty much everything that people need. In a sequel to my original novel someone invented a phone that could transmit a person's feelings directly to another, which made emojis and even sometimes words totally unnecessary, but I doubt that that's an innovation on the horizon yet. In fact to sell anything the first step is often not to invent the device but to invent the demand for it.

    The distant future gives scope for imagining how humanity itself has evolved or devolved. Has it developed new abilities or just continued to lose the ones that evolution gave it as it devolved all its responsibilities to technology? Even during my working years I saw this happening at my company. As we developed computer systems to perform tasks the staff ceased to know what had to be done in them. Terrifyingly even the department managers who were effectively still responsible for the tasks that the computers were doing for them didn't know what was involved. I remember trying to discuss one such task with the manager notionally responsible for it and he just said, "That's nothing to do with us. The computer does it," as though the computer had relieved him of his responsibility for it as well as the work. Already most of us are effectively specialists barely able to survive without our complex social structures to assist us. I recollect reading one science fiction story where spaceships were ancient technology that nobody understood any more but just used because they kept on working unaided for thousands of years and their designers were long extinct.

    A friend who went to create and run a training course in computer technology at a college was disillusioned by the experience, saying that the students no longer truly learned about computer technology but just about the interfaces, the fundamental technology being regarded as all done and dusted and not something that they needed to know about. I have seen the same thing happen at my old school. In my time there they had a "manual school" where we learned the hands on skills needed to fashion wood, metal and so on into useful objects. Nowadays they have a "design and technology centre" where the pupils create designs on computer screens and then CNC machine tools and 3D printers create the objects for them. At home now I can create useful objects, both the design stage and the actual physical task, by simply walking into my garage, looking at the piles of junk there and making what I need. That's a survival skill, but it isn't what modern children are acquiring apparently. Evidently even my angel and I can achieve more between us than later generations and we must assume that this trend will continue until in the distant future the human race is actually incapable of survival unaided and the least thing, such as a glitch in the technology or the evolution of an apparently insignificant new life-form, is able to eliminate it entirely. Let's face it, the film Wall-E, although fun, was actually about an appalling dystopian future almost as bad as in The Matrix.

    There's no problem with creating a utopian future instead of a dystopian one, but one must also create a sound basis for its existence, an explanation of how the so easily achieved dystopian possibilities were avoided and continue not to be a threat. That's the challenge of world-building, to have a plausible explanation of how that world ever came to exist and what its strengths and weaknesses are before one even thinks about the story to write within that context.

    My thoughts and writing on not just human evolution but also humanity's full recognition of the abilities that it has already evolved are too far removed from this discussion here to be worth mentioning.
    It would be ironic if utopia were our extinction event, like a huge giant massive cosmic 'game-over'.


    Hidden Content Monthly Fiction Challenge


    Beauty is nothing but the beginning of terror which we are barely able to endure, and are awed,
    because it serenely disdains to annihilate us.
    - Rainer Maria Rilke, "Elegy I"

    *

    Is this fire, or is this mask?
    It's the Mantasy!
    - Anonymous

    *

    C'mon everybody, don't need this crap.
    - Wham!





  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by bdcharles View Post
    It would be ironic if utopia were our extinction event, like a huge giant massive cosmic 'game-over'.
    I'm imagining the stars forming into the word:

    TILT


  5. #45
    10,000 Years from now humans will still exist (barring a cosmic catastrophe such as a near-by gamma ray burst, or a continent-sized comet dropping by to say, "Hi.") but they won't be significantly different from us biologically, just as we are not significantly different from out ancestors of 10,000 years ago. The population will be significantly lower than today, either because humans wake-up and realize an ever burgeoning population is not sustainable on the Earth's limited resources, or because the wanton consumption of those resources leads to cataclysmic results and the human population is pared down to a tribal level once again by war, disease, famine, etc.

    The current rate of population growth is not sustainable and flies in the face of the popular concept of humans as a space faring race. Space travel is expensive and resource hogging, even at the current infantile stages. The massive expenditures required to make off-plant dwelling feasible will be impossible while trying to sustain an increasing population even if fertility rates continue to drop. By 2100 the U.N. estimates world population to exceed 11 billion people. Almost 50% greater than today. That estimate assumes falling fertility rates, at current fertility rates the number of people scurrying around our planet would be in excess of 25 billion. At those population levels it will be very difficult to divert physical and financial resources to moving any significant portion of the population off-planet.
    “Fools” said I, “You do not know
    Silence like a cancer grows
    Hear my words that I might teach you
    Take my arms that I might reach you”
    But my words like silent raindrops fell
    And echoed in the wells of silence : Simon & Garfunkel


    Those who enjoy stirring the chamber-pot should be required to lick the spoon.

    Our job as writers is to make readers dream, to infiltrate their minds with our words and create a new reality; a reality not theirs, and not ours, but a new, unique combination of both.

    Visit Amazon and the Kindle Store to check out Reflections in a Black Mirror, and Chase

    Hidden Content






  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    The claim is that the human libido is behind more than just a reproductive urge, and is behind the motivation for the human race to have survived many of the obstacles and hardships that got us this far.
    In other words, it is viewed as a "motivator" to survival and adaption of the species.
    Its also stated that like the brain its self, the human sex drive and all of it's influences and effects are not well-understood.
    But that's not what you said. If it was I would have agreed with you. Obviously sex is a big motivator and maybe the biggest, but it is NOT the only motivator for everybody in the modern era. 1% of the population is asexual. I actually live next-door to a person who is trans and also asexual (aromantic actually). He told me about his life once. He's 56, never been in any relationship of any kind, lives alone but is generally a very happy person. He has a good job as an IT consultant and takes great care of his home and yard. In your world a person like that would likely be depressed, unemployed, homeless whatever -- "because why bother?"

    I see the asexuals of the future world as being much the same...? Why would it make a difference?


    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    As for any sort of asexual reproduction, adaptability ends up being lost there, resulting in less chance for survival if conditions change.
    Don't know what this means. Somehow adaptability is lost because the pregnancy came about via scientific decision instead of by two drunk people forgetting a condom? Don’t get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    On a non-scientific side-note, turn on the TV and see how many times something is sold using sex, or some message is passed along with the same message.

    Now imagine that going away.

    Or better yet, try to imagine whoever's using those methods and making billions off of them allowing it to go away.

    So... In the end, a loss of genders not only results in biological and psychological ramifications, it comes with socioeconomic ones as well.

    How soon and for what duration then becomes the question.
    Absolute nonsense and nothing whatsoever to do with asexuality.

    First, I'm not sure what channels you are watching but most successful commercials these days aren't particularly sexual anyway. The most popular ones (such as what gets shown during the Superbowl say) are humorous or heartwarming, not sexy. That's true in the world generally. Sure sexual content is popular, especially in certain genres of advertising (cologne, for example) but its not a cornerstone of marketing. It's one single element.

    Second, even if that's true, that sexuality is essential to sell things, so what? Society changes, finds new stuff. You know what used to be major material for use in advertising 100 years ago? Racism. Look at ads from the 1900's-1950's and there's very little sex but an awful lot of stuff about how certain dishwashing liquids can turn black skin white and that sort of thing. Yup. Then when racial themes ceased to be acceptable for use in ad campaigns there was no "socioeconomic" harm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    I already mentioned the expensive lab a few posts back up the thread. Yes, I know it's possible to reproduce that way.

    But... What happens when reproduction is no longer a "do it at home" project, and ends up falling under the control of some outside agency?

    Do you really think that improves the odds of survival for the human race?

    Do you not believe that could be the sort of thing that could and would start wars?

    Am I afraid of any of this? No.
    I think this is verging into conspiracy theory stuff. Personally I don't have much of an opinion on the relative benefits of artificial versus natural reproduction. I don't have any experience with it myself and it's not my field. Guessing it ain't yours either.

    What I do think is there is probably relative benefits of both, but that from a simple standpoint of "better genes, longer lives" that scientific innovation is generally a positive. I don't think there is going to be warfare over test tube babies, but I don't really know. Neither do you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    There's just not enough information to conclude anything for a certainty.
    "There's just not enough information to conclude anything for a certainty," says the man who one post earlier said that if asexuals ever become a majority it will *definitely* end up in humanity going extinct?

    You’re right. There’s not enough information to conclude anything for certain. That’s why I picked on you for doing exactly that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post

    Especially not given the problems that would come along with non-natural reproduction.

    Remember that when you throw real people in the mix - populations instead of figures on paper - shit tends to go sideways real fast due to the psychological factors.

    Start TELLING people what they have to do? You generally have a fight on your hands.

    ...though I suppose a bunch of androgynous drones/clones might be pretty easy for an army well-supplied with testosterone to handle.

    Still, it wouldn't bode well for the human race, no matter how that scenario turns out, would it?
    Ah yes, the clone-drone army with their dresses and make up and kale crackers and alternative pronouns, quickly dispensed of by an army of testosterone-fueled "real men".

    No, you're totally right, this is very likely to happen and is sure to be a total bloodbath. I'm sure the testosterone fueled alpha males will win though..?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    First off, I'm not concerned one way or the other about asexual behavior. Nor do I give a damn about my own 'reproductive value". My days of that even being a consideration are over.

    And I sure as hell don't have any fears or phobias concerning gay or lesbians, or... much of anybody, to be honest. I just find it amusing how little people see or understand about what's going on around them, and how things might/probably/will end up if some groups were to get their way. ( And I am not talking about any QNE small group here. )
    So you start by saying you are not concerned/phobic/etc and end by saying "nobody understands what will happen if some groups were to get their way" in relation to an alleged existential threat to humanity. That is two contradictory positions.

    I hear this stuff a lot from people who worry about getting called bigots. Look, either you are concerned or you are not. If you are legitimately not concerned then you are one of those people who does not "see or understand" this immense threat, the one you are either certain or uncertain exists depending on the moment...

    Head-bang-wall. Moving on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guard Dog View Post
    if nobody's having sex to reproduce anymore... why are fertility clinics doing so well?
    I think you should read this statement of yours again. Slowly.
    Last edited by luckyscars; December 3rd, 2018 at 08:32 PM.

  7. #47
    Mentor Dluuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    395
    Yeah, I have doubts on 'inventing' as a career in a remote future. In one set of notes, now boneyarded, for a Star Wars themed story, I noted that everything about the universe was known. Case in point, in the movies, they aren't making advances with research and invention, they are making advances with civil engineering. In other words, tech in that setting isn't dreamed up in a lab under scientific research of new novel discoveries, it's a process like this:
    "We know how to do it, but we can't build anything of a large enough scale to take advantage of it." - pretty much every science/tech literate person in the setting
    "Hold my beer." - Person who has consolidated absurd amounts of resources to be able to coordinate mindblowingly massive feats of civil engineering

  8. #48
    Lemmee play Devil's Advocate. Sci Fi has always struck me as an easy write, compared to 'conventional' fiction. A novel I'm currently working on features characters from the RCMP and JTF2 (Canada's elite, and secretive Special Forces). Details of training, proper language for given situations, history of, ranks, etc. have to be perfect, and research at times is exhausting. In sci fi the writer must be consistent with details once a fictional 'world' has been created, and the science should parallel real science. . .but a world 10,000 years from now can be any damn thing you want it to be. Easy. Relatively.
    Last edited by clark; December 3rd, 2018 at 09:50 PM.



    ________________________________________________

    "I believe in nothing but the holiness of the heart's affections and the Truth of the imagination". Keats, ​Letters

    "No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main . . . any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind. And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls -- it tolls for thee. " John Donne, Meditation XVII

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by clark View Post
    Lemmee play Devil's Advocate. Sci Fi has always struck me as an easy write, compared to 'conventional' fiction. A novel I'm currently working on features characters from the RCMP and JTF2 (Canada's elite, and secretive Special Forces). Details of training, proper language for given situations, history of, ranks, etc. have to be perfect, and research at times is exhausting. In sci fi the writer must be consistent with details once a fictional 'world' has been created, and the science should parallel real science. . .but a world 10,000 years from now can be any damn thing you want it to be. Easy. Relatively. Special fORCES
    Mostly agree but with the crucial point that it can't be quite ANYTHING or else (1) It won't be recognizably "our world" and (2) There are some aspects of physics that are more or less certain with regard to, say, how tectonic plates will move and so on. Terry D and others already mentioned that there are certain things that can be considered likely. It's not a total blank slate.

    Easy write? Not sure about that either. Certainly balancing the relative freedom of having fewer links to the present time with making sure there is at least something that makes clear it is the same world - the fossilized Starbucks coffee cup lid - doesn't strike me as all that easy if one wishes to achieve a sense of credibility. But I guess that depends on the writer.
    "If you don't like my peaches, don't shake my tree."

  10. #50
    Member Guard Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    1,499
    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    But that's not what you said. If it was I would have agreed with you. Obviously sex is a big motivator and maybe the biggest, but it is NOT the only motivator for everybody in the modern era. 1% of the population is asexual. I actually live next-door to a person who is trans and also asexual (aromantic actually). He told me about his life once. He's 56, never been in any relationship of any kind, lives alone but is generally a very happy person. He has a good job as an IT consultant and takes great care of his home and yard. In your world a person like that would likely not exist and if they did would be depressed, unemployed, homeless whatever -- "because why bother?"
    The higher the percentage of the population rises, the greater effect, no mater what you're talking about, what the condition or situation being discussed.

    Also, it would be best to define the terms we ( you ) are speaking of; Are you talking about Biological Asexuality, or Mental/Emotional asexuality or some combination of both?

    And is the person's body still capable of acting as a biological male or female as far as reproduction goes?

    If so, then the results will different ( for the general population ) than if it's otherwise.



    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    Don't know what this means. Somehow adaptability is lost because the pregnancy came about via scientific decision instead of by two drunk people forgetting to use a condom? Nah.
    If you don't know what it means, go look it up and study it a bit.

    And no, it has to do with an animal reproducing via one parent. Essentially biological cloning.


    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    Absolute nonsense and nothing whatsoever to do with asexuality.

    First, there are far fewer sexually-themed commercials now compared to a couple decades ago, mainly due to changes in values, and yet the advertising industry is bigger than ever. I'm not sure what channels you are watching but most successful commercials aren't particularly sexual anyway. The most popular ones (such as what gets shown during the Superbowl say) are humorous or heartwarming, not sexy. That's true in the world generally. Sure sexual content is popular but its not the foundation of all modern entertainment. It's a single element.

    Secondly, even if that's true, it doesn't matter. Society changes, finds new stuff. You know what used to be popular material for use in advertising 100 years ago? Racism. When racial themes ceased to be acceptable for use in ad campaigns nobody suffered from that.
    If you think it's nonsense you either haven't been paying attention, or you're no where near as bright as I thought you were.

    Commercials that are selling products that intended to make a person look prettier/younger/more appealing are SEX BASED.
    Car commercials with what I laughingly call the "car bimbos" are SEX BASED.

    Basically any advertisement that is using sex to distract, or to convince a person to pay attention to what is being said/sold.

    I am not speaking about strictly-sexual products like Viagra, condoms, or anything of the like.




    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    You sound quite afraid.
    I'm having a conversation/discussion. And that's something I can do with no fear at all.
    Especially on a subject like this, that no particular impact or direct effect on me.
    Yes, I find it interesting, but then, as I've said, biology, psychology, and the various other "ologies" have always been so for me.


    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    I think this is conspiracy theory stuff. I don't have much of an opinion on the relative benefits of artificial versus natural reproduction, honestly. It's not my field. What I do think is there is probably relative benefits of both but that from a simple standpoint of "better genes, longer lives" that scientific innovation is generally a good thing. No I don't think there is going to be warfare over test tube babies, but I don't really know. And neither do you.
    It's always difficult to tell what someone else knows, especially if it's not a subject one doesn't know much or anything about.

    Anyway, no, no one knows much of anything for an absolute certainty. However, one thing history has proven, it's that taking choices away from people, or taking control of certain choices, especially if they think something is a "right", never ends well.



    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    "There's just not enough information to conclude anything for a certainty," says the man who one post earlier said that if asexuals ever become a minority it will *definitely* end up in humanity going extinct.
    I said MAJORITY, I believe... Meaning gender-neutral and androgynous, incapable or reproducing without the aid of laboratories and machines, and more than 50% of a population. At least it was my intention for that to be understood.

    And yes, I did bother going through and reading up on what people far more qualified than you or I thought on the subject.

    Since it was simply their opinions, not any sort of documented study, I didn't bother mentioning it. However, their ideas on the subject are quite bleak when discussing the hypothetical possibilities of such things.

    No, I won't look it all up for you again. You have the same resources I do in that regard.





    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    Ah, the clone-drone army with their dresses and make up, wielding kale crackers and alternative pronouns, quickly dispensed of by an army of testosterone-fueled "real men".

    No, you're totally right, it will be a total bloodbath and is absolutely certain to happen. I'm sure the real men will win though.
    More sarcasm and snark. Funny. And should be, since I was at least half-joking with that.
    Still, when the tools for survival are in the hands and control of anyone other than the individual trying to survive... well, again, look back through history and see for yourself ho that kind of thing usually works out.

    So, no conspiracies, just observations. That's it.



    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    So you start by saying you are not concerned and end by saying "nobody understands what will happen if some groups were to get their way".

    Either you are concerned or you are not. If you are not concerned you are one of those people who does not "see or understand". Do make up your mind.
    I am a little confused, actually...

    Why do you think a person MUST be concerned or afraid to have a conversation about a particular subject?

    Do you?

    All I need is an interest in it. That's it.

    No concern, fear, apprehension etc. required. Just interest.




    Quote Originally Posted by luckyscars View Post
    I don't want to be unkind to you, Mr. Dog, so I'll just say this: Go ahead and read this sentence again. Slowly.
    Now you really are just being, snarky, sarcastic, and generally insulting.

    And I can assure you my reading comprehension is just fine.

    One last thing though... there's no need to call me "Mister" anything. Just G.D. or Guard Dog is fine here.


    Anyway, not one of your better posts,, but still interesting and entertaining.

    So, thanks for the conversation.




    G.D.
    Leave it be and it won't bother you.
    Screw with it, and it'll eat you alive.

    Soon enough, nations will play second fiddle to corporations.

    "The world is not what we wish it to be; it is what it is."
    "Freedom is the value, not protection."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.