|
While what we believe is "real AI" from a pop culture standpoint is in the same realm of feasibility as artificial gravity, that isn't what's being argued for. After all, we're talking about theoretical hard sci-fi fiction on television, the point would be to show artificial intelligence that isn't the "real AI" you're referring to anyway. Sure, like Bicyclops said, that gives a couple of "don'ts" that restrict the kind of stories you can tell but that doesn't mean you can't have interesting stories with it. I definitely agree that avoiding the trap of actually delving into the particulars except on a surface level is probably safest.
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
MikeJF posted:Quantum computing bears I want these now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:While what we believe is "real AI" from a pop culture standpoint is in the same realm of feasibility as artificial gravity, that isn't what's being argued for. After all, we're talking about theoretical hard sci-fi fiction on television, the point would be to show artificial intelligence that isn't the "real AI" you're referring to anyway. Sure, like Bicyclops said, that gives a couple of "don'ts" that restrict the kind of stories you can tell but that doesn't mean you can't have interesting stories with it. I definitely agree that avoiding the trap of actually delving into the particulars except on a surface level is probably safest. A lot of cyberpunk features that sort of "real AI" (for example, The Matrix).
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
This is the dumbest loving discussion I've read in a long time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:It'll just let us solve a certain class of problems a lot better, and the issues implied with natural-language processing and problem solving or indeed most machine learning are not really amongst those and thus will almost certainly stay entirely on normal, non-quantum computers. Counterpoint: quote:The team developed a quantum version of 'machine learning', a type of AI in which programs can learn from previous experience to become progressively better at finding patterns in data. Machine learning is popular in applications ranging from e-mail spam filters to online-shopping suggestions. The team’s invention would take advantage of quantum computations to speed up machine-learning tasks exponentially. quote:Such quantum AI techniques could dramatically speed up tasks such as image recognition for comparing photos on the web or for enabling cars to drive themselves — fields in which companies such as Google have invested considerable resources. (One of Lloyd's collaborators, Masoud Mohseni, is in fact a Google researcher based in Venice, California.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
Let me just sneak this one in I'm super sick and barely can do work today so there's basically no chance I'm doing a review tonight sorry okay go back to that dumb nerd poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
I hate this 'no true sci fi' discussion whenever it comes up. Though I do enjoy it when someone claims that Star Trek, the show with a new god like alien every other week, is somehow more 'hard' sci fi than Doctor Who (not that anyone here has said that, but I've heard the claim made before).GonSmithe posted:This is the dumbest loving discussion I've read in a long time. It appeared recently in the main Doctor Who thread, so I guess it inevitably had to spread here as well. Some people get really snobby about their sci fi and want to dismiss the stuff they don't like as 'fantasy'. Even though sci fi and fantasy are both in the same section of the book shop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
I'm more of a Stargate guy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:I'm more of a Stargate guy. I've been watching that since it's on UK Netflix. It... hasn't aged well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I've been watching that since it's on UK Netflix. It... hasn't aged well. I just watched it for the first time like a year ago and loved it... your nostalgia might be getting in the way!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:This is the dumbest loving discussion I've read in a long time. It's actually kind of interesting though, especially as compared with some of the previous tangents the thread has gone on. Juvenalian.Satyr posted:While what we believe is "real AI" from a pop culture standpoint is in the same realm of feasibility as artificial gravity, that isn't what's being argued for. After all, we're talking about theoretical hard sci-fi fiction on television, the point would be to show artificial intelligence that isn't the "real AI" you're referring to anyway. Sure, like Bicyclops said, that gives a couple of "don'ts" that restrict the kind of stories you can tell but that doesn't mean you can't have interesting stories with it. I definitely agree that avoiding the trap of actually delving into the particulars except on a surface level is probably safest. Well sure, there are absolutely ways in which you can limit your story and still tell it, otherwise every TV show would have literal magic in it. I think it depends on the stories you want to tell, though, and a lot of the driving force behind Star Trek and especially Doctor Who involves limitless possibility and the kinds of what-if scenarios you can concoct with that. There's a point at which explaining it too much almost removes a person's suspension of disbelief, which is probably why Treknobabble is such a popular writing bit. There's always a bit of a balancing act to play, but for better or for worse, Doctor Who decided to go pretty explicitly in one direction a long time ago, and I don't think it was the wrong decision for the show. Toxxupation posted:Let me just sneak this one in I'm super sick and barely can do work today so there's basically no chance I'm doing a review tonight sorry okay go back to that dumb nerd poo poo Good luck, I hope you don't have why I had the past four days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:
did you see a doctor
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:I just watched it for the first time like a year ago and loved it... your nostalgia might be getting in the way! Teal'c and Major Briggs are still cool, but I kind of hate most of the other characters. And man people think Star Trek and Doctor Who can be too preachy, they have nothing on Stargate. I just watched the episode where they go to the planet where they make their kids learn stuff and then mind wipe them to absorb their knowledge. O'Neill teaches one girl how to be a kid instead of a scientist by teaching her how to paint. Her knowledge is absorbed and now the too-serious race learns the value of having fun. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Let me just sneak this one in I'm super sick and barely can do work today so there's basically no chance I'm doing a review tonight sorry okay go back to that dumb nerd poo poo Sorry about your Ebola 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:did you see a doctor I watched one of the new episodes of the show, but in my delirious haze, the Doctor looked out of the screen and told me that not even mixing all the cures in a huge vat could do anything and I just needed to take a day off from work and spend most of the weekend sleeping.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Sorry about your Ebola YOU CAN'T JOKE ABOUT THAT OR ELSE IT'LL BECOME REAL LIKE COMMIES
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I hate this 'no true sci fi' discussion whenever it comes up. Though I do enjoy it when someone claims that Star Trek, the show with a new god like alien every other week, is somehow more 'hard' sci fi than Doctor Who (not that anyone here has said that, but I've heard the claim made before). I think as a practical matter, it's important to point out that every dramatized sci-fi show we can consider features fantasy elements that break a "hard sci-fi" convention. I *don't* think that this lessens the enjoyment of any of those series, at least in my view. I just think that if we're calling it like it is, then nothing on TV is hard sci-fi, and there are very good dramatic and production related reasons for that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I've been watching that since it's on UK Netflix. It... hasn't aged well. Looking back the first season of Snargate, in particular, features some utterly atrocious and downright offensive poo poo. The show's treatment of Carter in the first few episodes goes way beyond usual Hollywood sexism into downright misogyny and the scene where she flirts with O'Neil while a room full of men catcall like idiots makes me genuinely uncomfortable. Had I started watching Stargate now rather than when I was like 12 I seriously doubt I would have gotten through the first few episodes. Somehow, out of this utter dross came some very fine sci fi indeed. Stargate was never Breaking Bad but it became a show that, broadly, did what it did very well
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:It's actually kind of interesting though, especially as compared with some of the previous tangents the thread has gone on. There is literally nothing interesting about debating whether something is "hard" sci-fi or not or whether something that happens in a sci-fi related show/movie could "actually happen." It's fiction. Anything can loving happen because it is NOT REAL. There is literally 0 reason to argue to the contrary besides being a ridiculous pedant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:There is literally nothing interesting about debating whether something is "hard" sci-fi or not or whether something that happens in a sci-fi related show/movie could "actually happen." It's fiction. Anything can loving happen because it is NOT REAL. There is literally 0 reason to argue to the contrary besides being a ridiculous pedant. Your opinion has been noted, and it is wrong. I command the rest of the thread to ignore this guy's wrong opinion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:There is literally nothing interesting about debating whether something is "hard" sci-fi or not or whether something that happens in a sci-fi related show/movie could "actually happen." It's fiction. Anything can loving happen because it is NOT REAL. There is literally 0 reason to argue to the contrary besides being a ridiculous pedant. You sound like a real fun and cool guy, making GBS threads up a sci-fi thread with discussions on why sci-fi nerds are bad and should get wedgies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Because all fiction is filled with dreamstuffs from the land of make believe and therefore a lie, there is no need to discuss any gradation of suspension of disbelief or to separate fiction into genre. Please adjust your worldview accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:You sound like a real fun and cool guy, making GBS threads up a sci-fi thread with discussions on why sci-fi nerds are bad and should get wedgies. Bro I have a giant Doctor Who tattoo on my forearm and listen to Big Finish audios on my way to and from work every day, I'm pretty much the most deserving guy of a wedgie in the world besides maybe DoctorWhat (love ya bro). I just can't fathom how arguing over whether the technology of a show that is about a space alien who has infinite lives (shut up, I know it's not infinite) who travels through time and space to have awesome adventures is even close to an argument worth having. Too many people try to "win" at movies and shows by arguing what's "real" and how far they can suspend their disbelief, but I feel like there's a time and a place. The show(s) is (are) made to entertain. Who cares if the particle accelerator he uses has no feasible explanation of working? Why does that matter at all? You'll enjoy things a lot more if you accept the fact that something based so far outside the bounds of reality might not be 100% with their science and makes things up sometimes (all the time). But no you're right I love sports and you nerds deserve a wedgie and *faaaart*
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:Bro I have a giant Doctor Who tattoo on my forearm and listen to Big Finish audios on my way to and from work every day Burkion posted:YOU CAN'T JOKE ABOUT THAT OR ELSE IT'LL BECOME REAL LIKE COMMIES 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
I'm broadly with GonSmithe on this one. The scientific accuracy argument is some kind of crippling brain disease as far as I'm concerned. It does no one any good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:Bro I have a giant Doctor Who tattoo on my forearm and listen to Big Finish audios on my way to and from work every day, I'm pretty much the most deserving guy of a wedgie in the world besides maybe DoctorWhat (love ya bro). My point has far less to do about arguments over sci-fi (I don't really care), but more about the fact that the thread really wasn't lovely until you stepped in to try and poo poo on it. Now please take my off-handed insult even more literally and try to prove your cred.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:I'm broadly with GonSmithe on this one. The scientific accuracy argument is some kind of crippling brain disease as far as I'm concerned. It does no one any good. And you're largely wrong except for when you're not. If an episode builds its entire problem around a real world thing and expects you to take it seriously, they better do their math so to speak. On the flip side if the episode is something like Power Rangers where reality clearly isn't realistic, such as the moon having an atmosphere, well what the gently caress can you do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Honestly? I love Culshaw, but the mincing in that sketch bothers me, because it feels like it's done more because Barrowman's gay and does musical theatre than because Jack's bi/omni/whatever. Like he's compensating for a pretty poor impression with it. The mincing was bad, he should have been eating a piece of wood
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:My point has far less to do about arguments over sci-fi (I don't really care), but more about the fact that the thread really wasn't lovely until you stepped in to try and poo poo on it. Now please take my off-handed insult even more literally and try to prove your cred. I play Magic: the Gathering too and and and I guess you have a fair point, but after having recently experienced one of the absolute dumbest "reality" arguments in the main thread, I'd rather Oxx's thread not have 20 pages of turbonerds explaining why their show is bad and silly because the science doesn't match up. I guess I'm in the minority with that, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
There's only one option remaining to us: Oxxidation, initiate killallnerds.exe
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
No, you're right, I just think there are better ways to prove that point than to come in and tell nerds that what they're nerding about is stupid and expect them to get anything other than defensive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
quote:I just can't fathom how arguing over whether the technology of a show that is about a space alien who has infinite lives (shut up, I know it's not infinite) who travels through time and space to have awesome adventures is even close to an argument worth having. No-one is claiming that Doctor Who is hard sci fi or anything close to it. Doctor Who is not the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. Toxxupation posted:There's only one option remaining to us: My animes 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:There's only one option remaining to us: Actually that wouldn't work as an .exe file because 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:I play Magic: the Gathering too and and and It's because no one is presently ruining the thread or in the process of ruining the thread, at least beyond its pre-existing ruination. The minute I start to think this thread emulates the main one is the minute I lock it, request to have it gassed, and drop off a drugged Occupation in the heart of Cambodia where, I am told, the wi-fi never goes above one bar. Oh also yeah killin all nerds I guess  Wait, no, MY ANIME
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:It's because no one is presently ruining the thread or in the process of ruining the thread, at least beyond its pre-existing ruination. The minute I start to think this thread emulates the main one is the minute I lock it, request to have it gassed, and drop off a drugged Occupation in the heart of Cambodia where, I am told, the wi-fi never goes above one bar. There is no difference between this thread and the main one, loads of people post in both. This one has actually been worse for posturing meganerds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:There's only one option remaining to us: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
weary Forums Administrator William Shatner
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Y'all are coming pretty close to saying "No science fiction is hard because it has fictional elements in it".
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Dabir posted:Y'all are coming pretty close to saying "No science fiction is hard because it has fictional elements in it". To be fair, the vast majority of sci-fi isn't hard sci-fi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:There is no difference between this thread and the main one, loads of people post in both. This one has actually been worse for posturing meganerds. I dunno about that, I'm almost caught up on Season 8 now and I made my first foray into the main thread. it's like this thread, except every single poster is DoctorWhat
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 01:28
|
|