3 ms·
You already answered it yourself. Neal's work was fiction. He had a story to tell. a lesson/narrative to convey. His intent "got in the way" of possible reality
by famouswaffles 3y ago
You already answered it yourself. Neal's work was fiction. He had a story to tell. a lesson/narrative to convey. His intent "got in the way" of possible reality. Purely automated Primers didn't work simply because Neal didn't want them to in his story. There are no strong reasons as to why they shouldn't work. It's just human exceptionalism at work again.
The readers are not Neal. They may, as is their choice be far more concerned with the Primer's potential than with any narrative Neal was looking to convey.
- giraffe_lady 3y agoRight sure, you'll notice I'm not taking a position about its viability either way right? I'm pointing out that this conversation needs to be started by the ones creating the "primer", not us. "We made a thing from a book, the author thinks it wouldn't work but here's why we do" is a reasonable place to start. "We're reproducing a canonically failed fictional project without further consideration" is unserious at best. Torment nexus-y at worst. https://twitter.com/AlexBlechman/status/1457842724128833538 https://twitter.com/AlexBlechman/status/1457842724128833538
- famouswaffles 3y agoThe point i'm making is that Neal's work was fiction, not a peer reviewed paper from published scientists. You don't need to dispute anything anymore than the wright brothers needed to dispute Icarus. Neal was trying to tell a story, not trying to be right.
- giraffe_lady 3y agoThe icarus comparison is apt lol. You don't need to dispute icarus to make an internal combustion flying machine. But when you start beeswaxing feathers to your cloak I'm definitely going to ask what you think about him.
- lucubratory 3y agoI will give you time to respond to my other comment rather than pestering you over the thread, but when you do respond to it I think it adds to what I'm saying to make clear exactly where I'm disagreeing with you: Your position is that the author thinks TYLIP wouldn't work, I don't think that is supported by the text of the book, exemplified by the Mouse Army.
- hosh 3y agoThe mouse army were extensions of the automations of the Primer. Nell was able to lead and initiate things because she was the only one who really grew up. I remember someone noting a similar idea in Snow Crash -- that idea of biomass, in which that which lives becomes the extension of the machine, rather than the other way around.
- picadores 3y agoIts based upon a looping historic event though, the boxer rebellion..