"Which was more near to the future reality?" Topic

V, pretty much everyday life until the aliens show up….

Ghost in the Shell. At the rate computer science is progressing, it looks like about 2040 for the Net to be equivalent to what you see in the various GitS stories.

We're a bit behind the curve in cybernetic implants, compared to the official GitS timeline, however.

Another vote for Robocop

Just saw this thread.

"…Is it just the contrary nature of the public that when scientific opinion swings in the direction of their existence, the laity immediately say the opposite?…"

Laity? Scientists are not clergy though some think they are due worship because they are scientists.

It may be the current revelations about manipulating data.

It may be the poor track record of (inaccurately) predicting the future which some scientists have been prominent visably.

It may be pessimism in general due to recent history.

Gracias,

Glenn

En Avant 08 Feb 2010 2:52 p.m. PST
In your opinion and knowledge which was the SF serie or movie most near to our real future?.

Absolutely none of them. Science Fiction, despite the blather, has consistently, in the majority, failed to predict the future accurately. Some people have cherry-picked individual instances of what may have been good guesses by scattered authors to make a case but in reality nobody has that "pyschic seal of approval" about predictions of life 5 decades in advance much less centuries.

And thank God for that! 1984, with the crude cameras/computers and banks of watchers would be oppressive beyond the worst today.

We have it better than almost (if not all) the eras in the past. Dystopian novels/films make better story lines then utopian ones. We are not Utopia but we are better than the fiction would make you believe.

Gracias,

Glenn

*looks outside*

The Day After Tomorrow… >_>
link

Otherwise, Clockwork Orange.

Oh, come on. Today's hoodlums are not nearly that stylish.
-Kle.

(Aliens)You forgot their expertise in robotics, artificial intelligence, terraformation, cryonic freezing (and reanimation), implied genetic engineering and the powerloader.

Sure, but the technology that people used in everyday life was amazingly crap.

Besides, the powerloader wasn't futuristic, it was just ill-conceived.
-Kle.

Solar Babies.
What's not to like?
Roller skating kids save the world with the help an alien entity.

Besides, the powerloader wasn't futuristic, it was just ill-conceived.

At the time, I don't think the technology of the mid-80s was up to the task of building something that could do what the powerloader did.

As for "everyday" technology, everything I mentioned was being used in everyday life in the setting.

Warbeads exploded – "Just saw this thread.

"…Is it just the contrary nature of the public that when scientific opinion swings in the direction of their existence, the laity immediately say the opposite?…"

Laity? Scientists are not clergy though some think they are due worship because they are scientists."

Forgive me – I was using the term in its usage as the non-gender specific version of 'layman' from it's meaning as someone untrained in the specific trade.

Living in a country where the starting accountant earns 3 times what I do after 8 years practical experience, that asks whther our Nobel prizewinners have ever palyed rugby or are they just freaks, and where telling people what I do for a living gets me a gobbet of saliva in the face more often than not, I am pretty sure my self opinion fits in with your estimate of me, Warbeads.

"It may be the current revelations about manipulating data.

It may be the poor track record of (inaccurately) predicting the future which some scientists have been prominent visably."

Don't forget, there's the recent revelations about how scientists have been molesting children, persecuting homosexuals and kidnapping orphans from disaster areas. . . Clearly, the clergy are sooo far beyond reproach.

OK, I have now calmed down a little.

Glenn, I apologise for my tone in the previous message; I am pretty sure we both over-reacted over a simple matter of semantics involving one word. Admittedly, both of us have points that are valid, and both religious leaders and prominent scientists can get it wrong.

Science Fiction, despite the blather, has consistently, in the majority, failed to predict the future accurately.

With very few exceptions, no SF writers, for TV, big screen, or dead tree, have claimed to be doing so. The 'S' also stands for "Speculative", after all. If we cannot speculate on what a given advance might lead to, then we will always be caught by surprise.

When I first read Pohl & Kornbluth's "The Space Merchants" and Pohl's sequel "The Merchant's War", they were clearly depicting as unlikely a "pick an element and run with it" dystopia as any of the classic dystopias on the high school literature reading list.

Now I'm not so sure.