Author Topic: Bad science and science fiction  (Read 10653 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline carrotflowers

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2677
  • skepti-feboist
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #60 on: June 28, 2008, 10:17:34 PM »
Kurt - I actually recently added Moon to my queue, but had planned starting with the Vatta's War series. Have you read it / did you like it?

No, I haven't read those yet, but I plan on reading them. I've mostly read her short fiction in analog and SF&F. If you read vattas war first let me know what you think. I try to go alternate between "literary" scifi/fantasy and "pulp" scifi and i just finished up Charles Stross's family trade books so as soon as im done with this 2nd damn Malazan book i will need to find more pulp to start, which it sounds like the vattas war would cover. Just to clarify I don't mean pulp in a bad way, just in the space opera / adventure kinda way. Which reminds me the Kage Baker books are awesome too. check those out if you get time. Infact, if you have an e-reader, Tor gave away pdf's of the first book, In the Garden of Iden, I can email it or something. Tor has been giving away a book a week through their newsletter and some have been great. This weeks was the Battlestar Galactica novel.

Ha, Stross is also in my queue - specifically, The Atrocity Archives. Double Ha - I am also reading the 2nd Malazan right now. :) How far are you? I'm some chunk past the midway point, I think chapter 15. Last I heard from you, you were trudging through the first one. Although this has probably turned into a discussion better off in the Malazan thread, I suppose. But anyway, after I read the first, I chose to alternate with something lighter, so I guess I know how you feel. Usually if I go into a series I don't leave for other stuff.

 I understand what you mean by pulp, I don't take it as bad, and I'm sure I read quite my fair share of it. Perhaps I'll check out the Baker stuff too. A book a week, that's cool. I don't have an e-reader though. I actually recently started giving the Amazon Kindle some thought. Typically I don't like reading stuff electronically, and strongly prefer paper, even if I end up printing out pdfs.
on last.fm & librarything | I loathe you
______________________________________
With great intelligence comes great contempt for humanity. - thefellswooper

Offline Kurt

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4355
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #61 on: June 28, 2008, 10:23:31 PM »


Ha, Stross is also in my queue - specifically, The Atrocity Archives. Double Ha - I am also reading the 2nd Malazan right now. :) How far are you? I'm some chunk past the midway point, I think chapter 15. Last I heard from you, you were trudging through the first one. Although this has probably turned into a discussion better off in the Malazan thread, I suppose. But anyway, after I read the first, I chose to alternate with something lighter, so I guess I know how you feel. Usually if I go into a series I don't leave for other stuff.

 I understand what you mean by pulp, I don't take it as bad, and I'm sure I read quite my fair share of it. Perhaps I'll check out the Baker stuff too. A book a week, that's cool. I don't have an e-reader though. I actually recently started giving the Amazon Kindle some thought. Typically I don't like reading stuff electronically, and strongly prefer paper, even if I end up printing out pdfs.

I thought about the Kindle but the fact that it doesn't read pdf's turned me off. It seems to proprietary to me.
I eat babies
Well, hell jus froze over. I agree with Kurt here (although he is still a dick).

Offline KarenX

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6226
  • A Simple Girl with an Evil Plan
    • More Women in Skepticism
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #62 on: June 28, 2008, 11:02:21 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

Offline Kurt

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4355
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #63 on: June 28, 2008, 11:07:30 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

The fact that they have the ability to convert pdf to kindle but charge you for it rather then provide the software as part of the devices basic package makes me hate them all the more.
I eat babies
Well, hell jus froze over. I agree with Kurt here (although he is still a dick).

Offline DaveTheReader

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3590
  • Let me see
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #64 on: June 29, 2008, 04:35:33 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

I am very tempted by Kindle. It bothers me a great deal to think that I would have to buy content from one source only. I haven't been able to determine if I can download from other sources. Does anyone know? There is apparently a USB connector.
I have been thinking that I should just buy one - $360.

Offline carrotflowers

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2677
  • skepti-feboist
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #65 on: June 29, 2008, 05:07:21 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

The fact that they have the ability to convert pdf to kindle but charge you for it rather then provide the software as part of the devices basic package makes me hate them all the more.

Nah, looks like not necessarily a fee:

Quote

There's also been a great deal of confusion about Amazon charging for the conversion and delivery of our own content into our own Kindles. Amazon *only* charges for wireless delivery, the conversion is 100% free. If you eMail your content to YourKindleName@kindle.com it's converted and downloaded into your Kindle for 10 cents. But if, instead, you eMail your content to YourKindleName@free.kindle.com it's converted and a link to the converted file is eMailed to your registered eMail address at NO charge. You can then download it and use your PC's USB connection to transfer the content to the Kindle.


from a reviewer on the site
« Last Edit: June 29, 2008, 05:09:17 PM by carrotflowers »
on last.fm & librarything | I loathe you
______________________________________
With great intelligence comes great contempt for humanity. - thefellswooper

Offline carrotflowers

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2677
  • skepti-feboist
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #66 on: June 29, 2008, 05:11:45 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

I am very tempted by Kindle. It bothers me a great deal to think that I would have to buy content from one source only. I haven't been able to determine if I can download from other sources. Does anyone know? There is apparently a USB connector.
I have been thinking that I should just buy one - $360.

David,
I found some of the reviews on the product at the website to be pretty helpful in learning about how it all works. You may have already looked at these. I always do, positive or negative, I find the details about what a person liked or disliked can be informative. At any rate this one here is pretty thorough and pretty much convinced me to hold out for the next generation.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R3R24QH3CDS83N/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R3R24QH3CDS83N
on last.fm & librarything | I loathe you
______________________________________
With great intelligence comes great contempt for humanity. - thefellswooper

Offline DaveTheReader

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3590
  • Let me see
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #67 on: June 29, 2008, 06:50:44 PM »
I think the Kindle will convert files from PDF to a Kindle format for you. I also think there's a fee, but it's less than a dollar and may be ten cents. I don't have the device but I know the conversion fee is a lot less than the price of a book through Amazon.

I like the idea of Kindle but I hate the thought of how much I'd spend on content. Most of my books come through the library these days, and most of them I don't love that much.

I am very tempted by Kindle. It bothers me a great deal to think that I would have to buy content from one source only. I haven't been able to determine if I can download from other sources. Does anyone know? There is apparently a USB connector.
I have been thinking that I should just buy one - $360.

David,
I found some of the reviews on the product at the website to be pretty helpful in learning about how it all works. You may have already looked at these. I always do, positive or negative, I find the details about what a person liked or disliked can be informative. At any rate this one here is pretty thorough and pretty much convinced me to hold out for the next generation.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R3R24QH3CDS83N/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R3R24QH3CDS83N

Thanks. That pretty much answers the questions that I had.

Offline DaveTheReader

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3590
  • Let me see
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #68 on: June 30, 2008, 06:04:56 PM »

...
...

...
Quote
Maybe we should make a distinction between science fiction such as Arthur C. Clarke (hard sci-fi?) and Fantasy science fiction such as Battlestart Galactica and Star Trek? FTL, hypercommunications, Cylon babes etc flying with a light shining in your faces 'cause it looks purty?

...

And because I'm a nerd, it bothers me that the humans had such a hard time detecting cylons.  Boomer plugged herself in to the BSG mainframe in one episode and they can down load.  There has to be some easily detected hardware or a signal that can be detected.

Just like Lois Lane not figuring out that if Clark Kent took off his glasses he would be Superman. I think that is called a thin disguise.

In Isaac Asimov’s Forward the Foundation, Hari Seldon was unaware that his companion of 25 or 30 years, Dors Venabili was a robot, p.302. The woman who was called the “Tiger Woman” for her speed and strength was apparently just a regular girl to Hari Seldon. Also, she didn’t seem to age, except that her hair changed color.
Even mathematicians aren’t that unaware.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2008, 06:35:53 PM by David Neises »

Offline Frank

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 565
  • It'll be tea-riffic
    • The Account of a Lifetime
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #69 on: July 01, 2008, 04:11:18 AM »
In BSG, they had one scientist working on the problem who, working with poor quality equipment, managed to solve the problem of "Cylon or Not?"

Unfortunately, we all know (and love) this character and can thus understand why everyone else had such a hard time.

For me, Scifi gets divided up into lots of madness. SF is the stuff that tries hard to be scientific and not simply resort to fantasy and magic veiled as technology at every given turn. Scifi is...stuff themed as SF, but that doesn't require it as a premiss. A romantic tale needn't involve much romance, so to speak.

Similarly, we have Space Opera, Science Fantasy, Space Fantasy, Future Fantasy, Speculative Fiction, Historical Fantasy etc etc.

All involve science, technology and a degree of 'fantasy'. Given we don't quite understand how real-life characters work entirely, it's hard to see why we apply such rigid tests to our fiction. But there we are, we do it anyway.

Personally, I read alot of Games Workshop fiction and my Scifi program of choice is still Doctor Who. I like to look at my 'taste' as that of exploring ideas, not necessarily exploring science (so it's really more fantasy than SF). Of course, I'm very pleased and quickly drawn to anything that has some sort of science in it, but not everything will and even less than those that do will do it well, so it's best for me to keep low standards.

Provided there's a feasible degree of consistency and logic involved, I can usually cope. Too much inconsistency and I just can't keep up my Suspension of Disbelief. But then that applies to everyone! For me, I've found my SoD to last quite long. This way, I think, I begin to appreciate neat and clever SF alot more.
"...a sensibly dressed young man with a sensible name."
http://xisor.wordpress.com/

Offline spiney

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8831
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #70 on: July 11, 2008, 02:40:20 PM »
Prediction is futurology (and always wrong). Stuff about robots in every home was 1950s Hapers,Colliers, it wasn't Asimov! Actual hard sci fi has always been extremely rare. Most of the famous stuff was social satire.

I can't see anything wrong with hyperspacial jumps, the problem would be power needed.

Sci fi amost disappeared, a while, but now seems fashionable again.

Note, 2001 is really about The Overmind, an Olaf Stapedon obsession which recurrs though Clarke's novels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olaf_Stapledon

Offline Kurt

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4355
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #71 on: July 11, 2008, 02:52:09 PM »
Prediction is futurology (and always wrong). Stuff about robots in every home was 1950s Hapers,Colliers, it wasn't Asimov! Actual hard sci fi has always been extremely rare. Most of the famous stuff was social satire.

I can't see anything wrong with hyperspacial jumps, the problem would be power needed.

Sci fi amost disappeared, a while, but now seems fashionable again.

Note, 2001 is really about The Overmind, an Olaf Stapedon obsession which recurrs though Clarke's novels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olaf_Stapledon

Where the hell you been, spiney?
I eat babies
Well, hell jus froze over. I agree with Kurt here (although he is still a dick).

Offline spiney

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8831
Re: Bad science and science fiction
« Reply #72 on: July 11, 2008, 03:21:53 PM »
Orbit highly elliptical, I can only post when within range.

 

personate-rain