5 ms·

Probably my favorite hard sci-fi book. I haven't found the rest of the author's books (Peter Watts) as good, but I'm hoping his upcoming books change that. The

Probably my favorite hard sci-fi book. I haven't found the rest of the author's books (Peter Watts) as good, but I'm hoping his upcoming books change that. The sequel to Blindsight especially is a frustratingly opaque book, with a stilted pace in contrast with Blindsight (although several fascinating concepts are in there, if you take the time to read all the errata on the web in order to properly understand it). Also his blog is worth a read: https://www.rifters.com/crawl/ https://www.rifters.com/crawl/

thesz 8y ago
I lived through Chernobyl and I remember that radiation levels precluded robots from operating with radiowave remote controls. What Soviet engineers did is to operate robots with high voltage high current... electrical currents through wires. Everything was pumped up, from camera output to controls. My friend also prototyped well logging equipment with PIC16xxx microcontrollers which also can be operated with (relatively) high voltage (I remember 12V) and associated high currents. Well logging and Chernobyl disaster have one thing in common - high level of radiation. I was reading Blindsight after I read Echopraxia and was already suspicious about author (heck, vampires in E. have contradictory abilities - small musculature and high power, for one example). But when I read about "aperture leackage" I bursted out laughing and threw (PDF copy of) the book to the farthest corner of my room. Engineers from end of 21st century completely forget about experience from the end of 20th century. Nevermind relative cost of high-voltage high-current wires versus optical links. I divide fiction authors as being smart and being smartass (pretending to be smart with various things that look smart and hoping that he will cover things up somehow). Watts is a smartass by my classification as he thinks he can throw so many "ideas" there that reader will be overwhelmed and won't be able to find about true nature of his work. So I will not hold my breath that Watts will improve. Yet I found some concepts from Echopraxia interesting. For example, depth of planning - how intelligence services are planning, how higher intellects would plan. Echopraxia also made me thinking how and where Watts was (in fiction) or will be (in prediction) wrong and why. It raised my interest to long forgotten Noon series by Strugatskie brothers which serve as counterexample to what Watts have in mind. To conclude, Watt's work is conceptually very good science fiction that is very badly executed. This is so because it provokes thinking and argumentation (the sign of good literature) but is also so wrong in details (the sign of bad literature). Okay, I have to stop. Otherwise you will read a complete theory of everything by Serguey Zefirov soon. ;)
- saeranv 8y ago
  That's exactly what I found, but I think I'm more forgiving then your are. I agree, Watts is a smartass for certain* concepts, however I thought it worked in Blindsight because the story and concept is so original, and though-provoking that I didn't mind. It may because I didn't catch the technical contradictions like you did :) Because of it's technical density, and thought-provoking concepts, I think it's a book that rewards rereading (my favorite types of books). I've read Blindsight twice so far, and the second time I was able to appreciate, and understand better the massive amounts of technical detail he was pumping into the book. I may need a second reread of Echopraxia to get to a similar appreciation. In my first read (only a couple of months ago) I felt as if Watt's desire to be seen as smart starts coming off as a smartass. He buries every action in about 10 levels of subterfuge, and ambiguity, such that by the time I got to the end of the book, I knew I was missing about 50% of what was actually happening. What saved me was a Reddit thread Watts had done where he explained to his confused fans all the intricacies of the plot that he had hidden. Once I read through his explanation, I appreciated the book a lot more, and have to say if it was rewritten to be more understandable it would be at an equal or higher level of originality then Blindsight. What do you mean the Noon series is a counterexample to what Watts had in mind? * I say "certain" because he has a PhD in marine biology, so I assume his biological concepts are very rigorous.
  - thesz 8y ago
    >What do you mean the Noon series is a counterexample to what Watts had in mind? Basically, Strugatskie's tried to anticipate what would happen if most of horrors that are imaginable by 20th century SciFi authors are taken care of and would not happen at all. Watts tries to extend horrors we are used to to new lengths. If you look close enough, you'll see that these transhuman intellects are really parasites (trying to be symbiotes) that live on the body of humanity. They can't live outside, at least, it is not shown how they can. The Noon series talk about individual people at their peak as authors were able to imagine at the sixties-seventies. They can be thrown into radioactive wasteland and live and thrive there: Обитаемый Остров - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_Power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_Power. They posses extreme fighting skills: the same Prisoners of Power - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Sikorski https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Sikorski was able to avoid being injured when ambushed with twenty soldiers roughly of mid-20th century average power, armed with machine guns and managed to destroy them all; the main hero of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_to_Be_a_God https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_to_Be_a_God managed to fight many medieval-level fighters and not kill anyone - basically, all people in the Noon are equipped with "the switch" that father of Siri has and they still can control it consciously. In Blindsight Watts presented a device that is called "mentoscope" in Noon - see Siri memories about his mother and father fight. In Echopraxia it is revealed that these devices are used to bring whatever is pleasurable to populace: "they know how to make dream come true" or something like that about Echopraxia's pilot's marriage. This is about the same level of usage as in Prisoners of Power when Maxim's memories was recorded in Saraksh. In Noon's universe, however, the mentoscope is used to speed up learning and to bring the skills that are hard to obtain otherwise (hand combat system "субакс"/"subax" - why punch others to face when you can record what to do?). It is also used to suppress traumatic memories, bringing society member to his full potential again. In Noon, everyone lives the fullest possible life, even people that are clearly brought to life by possibly hostile supercivilization. They help each other even when they do not agree. In Firefall, the chasm is so big I can't even feel a thing about anyone there (I still think about them, though). Why in hell people still use terror tactics in end of 21st century (Siri is the victim, Echopraxia's pilot's wife is the victim) instead of helping hand tactics?

thesz 8y ago

I lived through Chernobyl and I remember that radiation levels precluded robots from operating with radiowave remote controls. What Soviet engineers did is to operate robots with high voltage high current... electrical currents through wires. Everything was pumped up, from camera output to controls. My friend also prototyped well logging equipment with PIC16xxx microcontrollers which also can be operated with (relatively) high voltage (I remember 12V) and associated high currents. Well logging and Chernobyl disaster have one thing in common - high level of radiation. I was reading Blindsight after I read Echopraxia and was already suspicious about author (heck, vampires in E. have contradictory abilities - small musculature and high power, for one example). But when I read about "aperture leackage" I bursted out laughing and threw (PDF copy of) the book to the farthest corner of my room. Engineers from end of 21st century completely forget about experience from the end of 20th century. Nevermind relative cost of high-voltage high-current wires versus optical links. I divide fiction authors as being smart and being smartass (pretending to be smart with various things that look smart and hoping that he will cover things up somehow). Watts is a smartass by my classification as he thinks he can throw so many "ideas" there that reader will be overwhelmed and won't be able to find about true nature of his work. So I will not hold my breath that Watts will improve. Yet I found some concepts from Echopraxia interesting. For example, depth of planning - how intelligence services are planning, how higher intellects would plan. Echopraxia also made me thinking how and where Watts was (in fiction) or will be (in prediction) wrong and why. It raised my interest to long forgotten Noon series by Strugatskie brothers which serve as counterexample to what Watts have in mind. To conclude, Watt's work is conceptually very good science fiction that is very badly executed. This is so because it provokes thinking and argumentation (the sign of good literature) but is also so wrong in details (the sign of bad literature). Okay, I have to stop. Otherwise you will read a complete theory of everything by Serguey Zefirov soon. ;)

saeranv 8y ago
That's exactly what I found, but I think I'm more forgiving then your are. I agree, Watts is a smartass for certain* concepts, however I thought it worked in Blindsight because the story and concept is so original, and though-provoking that I didn't mind. It may because I didn't catch the technical contradictions like you did :) Because of it's technical density, and thought-provoking concepts, I think it's a book that rewards rereading (my favorite types of books). I've read Blindsight twice so far, and the second time I was able to appreciate, and understand better the massive amounts of technical detail he was pumping into the book. I may need a second reread of Echopraxia to get to a similar appreciation. In my first read (only a couple of months ago) I felt as if Watt's desire to be seen as smart starts coming off as a smartass. He buries every action in about 10 levels of subterfuge, and ambiguity, such that by the time I got to the end of the book, I knew I was missing about 50% of what was actually happening. What saved me was a Reddit thread Watts had done where he explained to his confused fans all the intricacies of the plot that he had hidden. Once I read through his explanation, I appreciated the book a lot more, and have to say if it was rewritten to be more understandable it would be at an equal or higher level of originality then Blindsight. What do you mean the Noon series is a counterexample to what Watts had in mind? * I say "certain" because he has a PhD in marine biology, so I assume his biological concepts are very rigorous.
- thesz 8y ago
  >What do you mean the Noon series is a counterexample to what Watts had in mind? Basically, Strugatskie's tried to anticipate what would happen if most of horrors that are imaginable by 20th century SciFi authors are taken care of and would not happen at all. Watts tries to extend horrors we are used to to new lengths. If you look close enough, you'll see that these transhuman intellects are really parasites (trying to be symbiotes) that live on the body of humanity. They can't live outside, at least, it is not shown how they can. The Noon series talk about individual people at their peak as authors were able to imagine at the sixties-seventies. They can be thrown into radioactive wasteland and live and thrive there: Обитаемый Остров - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_Power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_Power. They posses extreme fighting skills: the same Prisoners of Power - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Sikorski https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Sikorski was able to avoid being injured when ambushed with twenty soldiers roughly of mid-20th century average power, armed with machine guns and managed to destroy them all; the main hero of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_to_Be_a_God https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_to_Be_a_God managed to fight many medieval-level fighters and not kill anyone - basically, all people in the Noon are equipped with "the switch" that father of Siri has and they still can control it consciously. In Blindsight Watts presented a device that is called "mentoscope" in Noon - see Siri memories about his mother and father fight. In Echopraxia it is revealed that these devices are used to bring whatever is pleasurable to populace: "they know how to make dream come true" or something like that about Echopraxia's pilot's marriage. This is about the same level of usage as in Prisoners of Power when Maxim's memories was recorded in Saraksh. In Noon's universe, however, the mentoscope is used to speed up learning and to bring the skills that are hard to obtain otherwise (hand combat system "субакс"/"subax" - why punch others to face when you can record what to do?). It is also used to suppress traumatic memories, bringing society member to his full potential again. In Noon, everyone lives the fullest possible life, even people that are clearly brought to life by possibly hostile supercivilization. They help each other even when they do not agree. In Firefall, the chasm is so big I can't even feel a thing about anyone there (I still think about them, though). Why in hell people still use terror tactics in end of 21st century (Siri is the victim, Echopraxia's pilot's wife is the victim) instead of helping hand tactics?