<scratching head with a puzzled look>
Apparently it's only 11K...even though in my Inbox it
says 26... Go figure!

> Two writers explain why Science Ficion has predicted
> so much of the future

> �Anything one man can imagine, other men can make
> real,� Jules Verne wrote
> in the 19th century. Along with H.G. Wells, Verne
> created the
> science-fiction genre-and with it a mystique that
> science-fiction writers
> have special powers of prognostication about
>technology. Verne, himself, anticipated
atomic-powered
> submarines in Twenty Thousand
> Leagues Under the Sea and interplanetary travels in
> From the Earth to the
> Moon  Wells wrote about an atomic bomb in 1914.
> Modern sci-fi writers have extended this tradition,
> envisioning cyberspace
> and cellphones long before the actual things took on
> those names.

> Two modern practitioners of the craft-David Brin and
> Bruce Sterling-say
> science fiction can help penetrate the murk of the
> future partly because
> writers follow technological possibilities to their
> dramatic extremes,
> taking them further than most people are
> constitutionally capable of doing.
> Sterling has seen the phenomenon first-hand. Eleven
> years ago, in �We See
> Things Differently,� he described a suicidal Islamic
> terrorist who commits
> high-profile murders in the U.S. in the 21st
century.
> The lines between fiction and prediction sometimes
> blur. Sterling is known
> for his many science-fiction novels, including his
> latest, Zeitgeist but he
> also serves on various futurist committees. Brin has
> written numerous short
> stories and novels, including The Postman which was
> turned into a big-budget
> motion picture. But Brin is also on the development
> boards of a number of
> software companies, including SAP AG (www.sap.com
> <http://www.sap.com>), the
> big database provider.
> Neither claims that sci-fi writers� successful
> descriptions of the future
> would seem remarkable if subjected to rigorous
> analysis of their hit rate.
> Still, in the dialogue that follows, both offer some
> intriguing ideas on how
> to develop scenarios that may shed some light on
> tomorrow�s marketplace.

> BRUCE STERLING: Science-fiction writers often
> predict the present, focusing
> on some little-known thing and casting it into the
> future.
> Writers also sometimes emphasize an issue that is
> common knowledge but that
> society can�t admit to itself. For instance, most
> people can�t talk about
> venereal diseases. If a writer can think about a
> topic like this
> objectively, he might imagine that in societies
> where people couldn�t talk
> about AIDS, such as sub-Saharan Africa and South
> Africa, the disease would become an epidemic.
> The truth is that what looks like a prediction often
> is really just playing off people�s ignorance.

> DAVID BRIN: At the same time, science fiction does
> take some pride in its
> prognostications. There are times when some things
> we write about really do come to pass.

> STERLING: One example occurred just recently. This
> past fall, a special
> adviser for cyberspace security was appointed by
> President Bush. A
> science-fiction writer imagined that position back
> in the 1980s. Science
> fiction has influenced the missile defense program.
> The idea has taken root
> so firmly in some influential people�s minds that
> the program has survived
> for ages even though it has no connection to
> reality. Star Wars has as much
> to do with American national security as lucky
> horseshoes. It will never
> work. Even if it did, terrorists would bring
> warheads over in container ships and trucks.
> Historically, there are any number of things that
> science-fiction writers
> imagined long before they came about. H.G. Wells
> wrote about the atomic bomb in 1914 in The World Set
> Free
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1576462765/ref=ase_diamondtechnologA/103-0336587-1846249>
> Cleve Cartmill described an atomic weapon in detail
> more than a year before it was actually used.
> In 1869, Edward Everett Hale wrote about an
> artificial satellite orbiting
> the earth, in a story called �The Brick Moon.� In
> 1945, Arthur Clarke wrote
> about satellites used for communication. There is
> even a type of satellite
> orbit that is sometimes called the Clarke orbit,
> after him.
> In the 19th century, Jules Verne wrote about space
> travel and the submarine.
> In 1904, Rudyard Kipling predicted airmail postage.
> Hugo Gernsback was very
> big on a thing called television in �Ralph 124c
> 41+�-a bizarre story written in 1911-1912.
> Sci-fi writers wrote about computer worms and
> viruses back in 1975.
> Cellphones appear in Robert Heinlein�s stories as
> early as the 1950s. In his
> story �Waldo,� published in 1942, Heinlein was one
> of the first to talk
> about remote manipulators, the devices people now
> use to handle radioactive
> materials. People put their hands in these
> glove-like devices, and these big
> robot arms spring up and follow your movements.

> BRIN: Now they are being used in surgery. Heinlein�s
> predictions for the
> remote manipulators had to wait until computers
> arrived. It will take
> another five years or so for the Waldo age of
> teleoperations to truly emerge.

> STERLING: As far as what is yet to come, I�m
> interested to see what happens
> with ubiquitous computing [the notion that tiny
> electronic chips may wind up
> everywhere]. I wrote a story about the idea
> recently, called �User-Centric.�
> The central idea is that people can embed locator
> chips in common devices
> and track their movement in real time.
> BRIN: I believe we are heading in that direction.
> The topic of monitoring devices is fascinating. In
> both my fiction and
> nonfiction work, I explore the proliferation of
> cameras that record our
> movements. A decade ago, in my fiction book, Earth
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/055329024X/ref=ase_diamondtechnologA/103-0336587-1846249>
> I predicted that people might be walking around in
> glasses that could look up information about other
> people as folks walked
> nearby, based on a program that recognizes their
> faces and then supplies
> their names and a bit of a profile. The program
> could include what these
> people are looking for in potential mates or even
> include unfavorable
> opinions about them by their ex-spouses. Imagine
> people walking down the
> street, glancing at each other and bursting out
> laughing. Instead of the
> technology being Orwellian, it may be weirdly
> democratic. The effect might
> be rude, but at least it would be unrestricted and
> available to everyone.

> STERLING: Facial recognition software is a big
> stinking deal right about
> now, because of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
> Still, the gizmos imagined in science fiction aren�t
> necessarily the ones
> with the most market pull. For example, science
> fiction has traditionally
> been obsessed with human-shaped androids and
> humanoid robots. While there is
> real demand for robots, the demand is not for
> anything shaped like your next-door neighbor.
> We science-fiction writers retail a sense of wonder.
> We always want to talk
> about the rising star moment. We don�t want to
> explore the boring, everyday
> device or yesterday�s technology. But wonder is a
> very brief emotion.

> BRIN: That�s right. Very few science-fiction authors
> portrayed computers
> advancing the way they did. They failed to predict
> the personal computer
> because a giant civic computer in the center of town
> is far better for a
> dramatic story. If the big computer is evil, it
> gives characters something
> to fight. If it is good, it gives them a terrific
> prize to protect. No
> wonder authors never created a different scenario
> and never imagined a million small computers.

> STERLING: As sci-fi writers, we tease out the
> dramatic aspects of events and
> don�t give dry, probabilistic assessments of future
> events.  There are times when we are asked to give
> straightforward assessments of
> future events. I just did one recently about where I
> thought political and
> military events might go in the short term. But
> there is no heroine, no love
> interest in that. There is no rising tension,
> climax, and d�nouement, no
> reason to keep turning pages. That�s why it is only
> two pages long.

> BRIN: Science fiction has long interacted with
> scientists, artists, and
> underground eccentrics. Now there are times when
> sci-fi writers mingle with
> the military and business. We�re on boards and even
> act as advisers to
> corporations. I am on the development board for
> several small software
> companies, as well as for SAP. I even filed for my
> first patent recently,
> for a new approach to chat software.

> STERLING: I haven�t started filing patents yet. I�m
> afraid of the day some
> notion of mine goes into production. You�re right,
> though. I spend time
> hanging out with the Global Business Network
> [www.gbn.org
> <http://www.gbn.org>], which is now a part of the
> Monitor Group
> [www.monitor.com <http://www.monitor.com>] of
> corporate futurists.

> BRIN: Someone once said there are two ways of
> dealing with the future:
> anticipation and resiliency. These qualities are
> modeled by the two major
> software industry centers in America: the East
> Coast, particularly Boston,
> and the West Coast, centered in Silicon Valley.
> In the East, customers are mainly made up of
> government and commercial
> banks. Software companies must anticipate problems
> before they release a
> product because they don�t want ATMs spitting money
> out on the street. So
> they try to anticipate all the bugs before they ship
> software to their
> clients. The attitude in Silicon Valley, on the
> other hand, is, �What a cool
> idea! Let�s do an experiment and have customers tell
> us why it doesn�t
>  work!� That�s the resiliency approach, which
> depends on a rapid and agile 
> response to cope with disaster.
> It turns out that any reasonable approach for
> dealing with the future needs
> generous dollops of both anticipation and
resiliency.

> STERLING: Given the events of the last few months, I
> expect we�ll see a
> change in how business thinks about the future.
> There was a long period
> during the 1990s when people almost deliberately
> stopped thinking about the
> long term. The sentiment was: �Just give me the
> demo.� Or �Build it and they
> will come.� I believe that epoch has ended.
> We�re now in for an era of a global civil society,
> which will involve more
> anticipation and control. The idea of tossing out
> innovations and letting
> the devil take them where he may is probably gone.
> Because we do have a devil.
> 
> Sterling can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Brin
> can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus � Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to