Ladies and Gentlemen, Dr. Larry Niven 484
1) Fallen Angels, Baen Free Library, and RMS
by Robotech_Master
Your collaborative novel Fallen Angels is available in the Baen Free Library. What prompted you to make it available there?
Have its paper sales picked up since you posted it there? (Assuming it's still in print to be sold.) Might you consider making some of your other works available that way?
Also, Fallen Angels features a couple of references to one of the ultimate ubergeeks of the Linux world, Richard M. Stallman. Who was responsible for that? (I'm guessing it would have been Pournelle.) Are there any amusing stories associated with those appearances?
Niven:
Jim Baen's theory is that putting a work on the net will sell more paper copies. Paper books are easier to read and carry around. I thought it worth testing. So did my collaborators.
I don't have figures on whether it worked: raised the sales of Fallen Angels. I'll have to ask Jim Baen. If the theory holds, sure I'll make more stuff available. Long ago I gave away Net rights to certain short works, "Man of Steel/Woman of Kleenex" and "Down in Flames".
Richard Stallman must have ben put in by Jerry or Mike, not by me. We all did some research into science fiction fans; I introduced Mike Flynn to several on the West Coast, and he found his own in the East. Most of the characters in the book are real people suitably altered.
2) Is Science Fiction healthy?
by technoCon
Lots of folks love SF: Today there's a cable network and a nauseating volume of Star Trek reruns. Computer graphics makes it feasible to put a movie into any imaginable setting. Technology is being deployed so quickly that Vernor Vinge's singularity comes to mind. Technological progress is moving so fast it is hard to anticipate it.
NASA is dinking around in LEO: Boldly going where John Glenn has gone four decades before. I don't know who said it: The future just ain't what it used to be.
The Sputnik generation is graying: When I was a lad, I watched moon shots. It captured my imagination. I read any book that had a rocket on its cover. I'm late forties and will be dead of cancer soon.
Writers are moving out of SF: William Gibson's latest novel has high geek content, but none of the science isn't already deployed. Same for Neal Stephenson's _Cryptonomicon_: good story with high geek content, but nothing beyond the current state of the art. And I've seen guys who once wrote Hard Science Fiction branching out to Fantasy.
Publishing is corporatized: The huge bookstores I haunt have SF sections that are overcrowded with Fantasy and StarTrek, StarWars, Babylon5 & (insert corporate franchise here) serials.
It looks to me as if Science Fiction is in trouble, or it may be sick, or it may be dead and doesn't know it yet.
What is your assessment of SF's health and which of these considerations do you think most significant?
Niven:
We were a tiny, despised cluster of the socially inept when I first found other science fiction fans. Today we have a hell of a lot more respect, success, and money. The field is healthy.
Yes, good SF writers veer into fantasy and mainstream. I do it too. It's a break, a vacation. Don't let it disturb you.
As for the rest--do you see the media invading the science fiction field? It's the other way around. We've fully corrupted them; it only remains to educate them too.
But we ourselves are not moving into space.
Note: we're learning about the universe at an amazing rate. We're exploring the planets. We've got everything we hoped for, except that human beings aren't going and aliens don't seem to be waiting. I don't know what to do about that, except to show the dream to as many minds as I can reach.
Most of my friends are convinced that NASA is the great roadblock. I have my doubts. We persuaded Goldin that all he had to do was fire two levels of NASA bureaucrats and...he managed it, and magic didn't happen. Maybe what we're up against is the universe.
3) Intersection of SciFi and Gaming
by Shadow Wrought
What do you think of video games as a future outlet for original SciFi universes? Do you think that the interactive environments games provide will appeal to writers who would otherwise create movies or shorts?
Niven:
I love it. Any new market (such as video games) opens more options for creativity, and more money. Games and movie/tv and books will feed into each other. Mind you, that's hard on the novices: competition is going to get fiercer yet.
4) Cautionary tales?
by J. Random Software
You've built worlds with uncommonly dystopian elements, such as Plateau's long tyranny over a disarmed populace, organlegging, all-out war with ruthless aliens, and suppression of dangerous technology. Have you intended any of these to be cautions about likely (or even inevitable) events, or just interesting to think about?
Niven:
Sure, they're all intended as warnings. Nevertheless--what I've been serving up through most of my career are the dark sides of bright futures.
Organlegging, including State executions for organs, is the dark side of longevity, advanced medical techniques.
Disarmed populace and suppression of dangerous technology seem inevitable. Be warned.
War with aliens seems less likely, except that an enemy is always alien to some extent.
Plateau was fairyland with a single flaw.
5) Favorite book?
by emarkp
Of the work you've written, does one title in particular have a special place in your heart? Douglas Adams once said that his book "Last Chance to See" was the one book he'd hope that people read if they only read one of his books. Is there one book of yours you'd like people to have read?
Similarly, if I were to introduce someone to your books, which one would you suggest I give him first?
Niven:
What book you give depends on who you're giving it to. To a mundane, give LUCIFER'S HAMMER. To a scientist, give THE INTEGRAL TREES. To someone who already wants to write, or to know about Niven, give N-SPACE or PLAYGROUNDS OF THE MIND or the forthcoming SCATTERBRAIN. Fantasy fans and Angelinos get THE BURNING CITY. If I had to bet my reputation it would be on RINGWORLD.
6) Intelligence and Wisdom
by Kostya
Could you comment on the difference between intelligence and wisdom? You seem to hint at some ideas in Ringworld Throne when Wu chooses to depose the Vampire Protector because he was not wise enough.
In these Pak Protectors, we have unbelievably intelligent and clever beings, but wisdom does not seem implied. What are your thoughts on wisdom, and what points were you trying to make? Considering the audience for most of your books (geeks, "smart folk"), it's an interesting point to include.
Side question: where did you come up with the idea of the Pak, especially as human ancestors? It has to be one of the more original conjectures about effects of old age that I have ever read :-)
Niven:
My father and stepmother got us into a night class in hominid development. From what I learned, and one initial assumption, I extrapolated protectors. The assumption was, every symptom of aging is a stunted version of something intended to make us better able to defend our descendants.
Fans have pointed out developments even I missed. Thus: We breeders have a stunted sense of smell because our protector forms would otherwise be obeying their noses, rejecting outsider mates for their breeders, causing inbreeding.
The original (Pak) protectors are still too reflexive: they've got intelligence but not wisdom.
Intelligence is a tool or tool set. Wisdom is what you do with that. I've met people who specialized their intelligence, who never developed a life. I know yoga students like that too.
I've written at length about wisdom and intelligence because I didn't have a short answer.
7) What do you read?
by caesar-auf-nihil
Mr. Niven,
I'm always curious about what authors read for either inspiration, or what they find to be good literature. What books (science fiction or otherwise) have influenced your work, or do you find to be delightful reads. Any favorite authors?
Thank you for your time.
Niven:
THE WIZARD OF OZ seems to have inspired me as a child.
Today I read a lot of science fiction, and I take friends' advice for what else pops up. I loved CRYPTONOMICON. I read everything by Tim Powers and Terry Pratchett and a lot of Connie Willis. Some really good hard SF writers have popped up, and I read them: John Barnes, Bruce Sterling, Stephen Baxter. Barbara Hambly's detective fiction. Patrick O'Brian's sea stories, courtesy of John Hertz.
8) Why is there no religion in Known Space
by Adam Rightmann
I know most SF writers aren't big on religion, but religion occupies a very large space in your collaboration with Pournelle, "The Mote in God's Eye", yet is conspicously lacking in Known Space. Is the religion in "Mote" all Jerry's doing?
Niven:
Yes, it is. I'm not comfortable speculating on the development of new and established religions. The Kdaptist heresy was a joke. INFERNO was a compulsion: I'd read Dante's INFERNO and my mind wouldn't let go of it, and I sucked Jerry into it too. My motives weren't religious, they were a storyteller's.
9) Crossing my fingers
by Demona
Was your cease-and-desist regarding Elf Sternberg's "The Only Fair Game" motivated more by a personal aversion to the content, or a desire to retain control over "your universe"? How does this jibe with your statement in Ringworld Engineers that "If you want more Known Space stories, you'll have to write them yourself"?
Niven:
I couldn't remember "The Only Fair Game", so I used your link.
I don't buy its premise. An older species won't have human versatility in sex: sexual responses will be all hard wired. Kzinti females won't be soft and unresponsive, either. You die if you make that mistake.
I probably issued a cease-and-desist when the story was described to me as violating my copyright. It does that, of course, and I notice the "desist" had no effect.
Once upon a time there was a gaming article that blew away the punch lines of several Man-Kzin War stories. I asked that it not be published. In that case too, I acted to protect my copyrights and my authors.
More generally--"If you want more Known Space stories" was intended as an invitation to daydream, not to violate my copyrights and steal my ideas. Turning such dreams into stories is only done under restricted circumstances and with permission.
But these dreams can make my morning. I love it when someone sees an implication I missed. (I get these via email, usually, or as Man-Kzin War stories.) And after all, there are things I can't copyright or patent or trademark. "Halo" looks like a poor man's Ringworld, but I didn't invent spin gravity.
10) Movie Jealousy?
by spun
David Brin has been forthright concerning his jealousy over bad SF being made into movies while his work is not. With the exception of 'Forbidden Planet' I have yet to see a science fiction movie that draws me in the way a good Sci-Fi book does.
I also think that your works would make excellent movies. Brin's work would probably play well in Europe, where people seem to prefer a little more ambiguity in their movies. It probably wouldn't do well here. Now, I'm not saying your writing isn't of the same caliber as Brin's work, but it is a little more accesible to the common man, and therefore seems well suited to be made into a blockbuster that would do well in the states. My questions: 1.) Are you at all jealous that lesser talents get to have their work seen by millions on the silver screen? 2.) Have you been approached by any producers regarding screenplays of your work? 3.) Would you even want to have your works made into movies?
That said, I just have to say thank you for providing me with so much quality entertainment! I grew up reading your stories from the time I was ten. In my esteem, you are one of the best well rounded Sci Fi authors out there. Your work has great characters, fantastic settings, believable science, and lots of action. Thanks again.
Niven:
Sure I'm jealous, and angry. I've waited too long to take my family to a movie made from my works, and now my mother's gotten to old to go. I'm glad to see Brin's "The Postman" on the big screen. I like his message. But I'd like to see Harry the Mailman, from "Lucifer's Hammer", up there too.
And sure I've sold rights and options, and written a Star Trek cartoon and sold an Outer Limits episode, but it's not the same as walking into a theater. Movies cost a lot more than options do.
Yes, I would like to see my works made into movies. All of them. Short stories as well as novels. Why not? A movie doesn't ruin a book; the book is still there, unchanged, and may even see a larger audience. See Vince Gerardis of Created By, my agent, if you've just won a lottery.
Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wisdom vs. Intelligence (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"Enough said" (Score:1, Insightful)
Learn to use google before you show the world how truly ignorant you are.
Hear, hear (Score:5, Insightful)
I interpret that it is not that he sees no value in protection of ideas and innovation, but that he sees the reasonable limits and values of that protection. Hear, hear, Dr. Niven.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously the Niven book that would make the best big-budget effects monstrosity of a film would be Ringworld... but cast the wrong person as Louis and you face disaster. Making Speaker-to-Animals and Nessus look plausible would be a heck of a job, too. Compared to that, the CG involved in creating the ring, the flycycles and the flying buildings would be trivial.
Re:Paper Copies (Score:3, Insightful)
So, I have a Sony Clie. Screens a bit small, but it's quite sharp.
On it I have a free program, 'PalmReader'. It basically shows about a paragraph at a time on the screen. Since the Clie has a thumb scroll wheel, this is quite usable.
Using a 128MB Memory Stick, I have enough room for quite a few books. I went to Project Gutenberg [promo.net] and downloaded several classic works. You know, all those books your English Teachers thought you were old enough to appreciate in 11th grade but weren't.
So now I carry around a small virtual library of English Literature, and whenever I find myself stading around waiting for anything, I start reading where I left off (Hell, I replaced the ToDo list button with the Palm Reader for quick access). It's now by far the most used program on my Palm. I even finished 'Count of Monte Cristo' on the airplane with it.
Quite easy to implement, and infinitely useful.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
All that said, I still foamed at the mouth when I found out Verhoven had dropped the powered armor from Starship Troopers. He pretty much proved he couldn't direct, or select good actors, too.
I hope the Heinlein estate made good money off that monstrosity.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:3, Insightful)
A good book is always going to be more cerebral than any movie made out of it. I prefer when a director/scriptwriter is inspired by the story and translates it into a good film, rather than trying to recreate the book page for page.
Kubricks "The Shining" is another good example. The movie tells an altogether different story than the novel, but both are excellent.
Re: Answer 2: Is Science Fiction healthy (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of what's called good science fiction is actually good story telling. Nothing wrong with that, but story telling can play in any field. Science fiction is different. Ringworld was a great concept for a science fiction story. But it made use of a lot of magic (hyperdrive) to make the story work. So it's a great story, and a good science fiction story.
With that background: It seems to me that science fiction is both in trouble, and more vital than ever. The reason science fiction is in trouble is the same reason that even narrow specialists can't keep up with their fields. And that's the same reason that it's more important than ever. I consider Lobster's (et seq.) to be the best science fiction that I've read in the last decade. There's almost no magic in them. The only weakness I see is that some of the characters are a bit difficult to empathize with. Which weakens it a bit as a story, but not as Science Fiction. But, and here's the catch: Lobsters takes place within the next 50 years. (10 if I take the story literally.) Now if things are changing that fast, and they appear to be, long term projections go right out the window. (As it was, Larry Niven used hand-waving magic to justify not using computers to navigate hyperspace. And it took magic, because without magic 1: people wouldn't be able to do the navigation, and 2: computers would have done a much better job. But people make a much better story.)
So I say that science fiction is in dire trouble, and that most of what passes for science fiction is really just high-tech fantasy. But there are still a few exceptions.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:2, Insightful)
Each of us may read the same novel, but we will formulate our own mental picture.
Any movie will, perhaps, come close to what some of us imagined, but it will never be an exact copy of what we all imagined.
Personally, I have found that if you disconnect the novel from the movie, at least a little, you get to enjoy it more as a seperate story than as a carbon-copy-that-failed story.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:4, Insightful)
You could be right. The human race has shown a weakness for impossible dreams. Consider, for example, ancient mythologies, or the "ideal" of modern communism. Myths about gods residing on Olympus and entering into the affairs of humans are clearly not true. Similarly, the notions of that contemporary mythology known as communism have been similarly discredited.
However, we do know that the NASA-aerospace industrial complex has many dysfunctional features. In some ways it's been getting worse over the years. Can current NASA problems be fixed? Reforms have been successfully made to other institutions.
Before we chuck out our dreams, perhaps we should consider changing the current approach to the problems. This could mean reform of the existing establishment, creating new ways out of whole cloth or some combination.
Goldin's efforts probably worsened the existing situation. It remains to be seen whether the impact of O'Keefe's reforms will be positive or negative.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:3, Insightful)
You, and all who pan Troopers in the same manner, have missed the point. It was the point to make it a campy B movie. They were lampooning the conformist attitude and showing the effects of totalitarian rule. Intellect is marginalized unless it is directly controlled by the state. The mindless football stud is elevated to puppet-hero; a perfect vassal for the powers that be. A violent reaction to those who are different. I realize books tend to be much better and have more depth than movies, but jesus, did the entire geek community only see the surface reflection of this movie????
Solomon. (Score:5, Insightful)
That question reminds me of the story of Solomon deciding which woman was the baby's mother.
1 Kings 3:16-28 [gospelcom.net]
Nowadays most knowledgeable and intelligent people would suggest using DNA tests for such a case.
In contrast, Solomon's method would find out who was better suited to be the baby's mother. Even if you are physically the baby's mother, if you'd rather the baby be chopped in two, you aren't a mother to the baby.
Whilst many intelligent people have a tendency to answer just the given question, a wise person will often give an appropriate response for the entire situation.
Giving correct answers to questions shows your your knowledge and intelligence. Responding appropriately to the entire situation shows your wisdom.
what for sci-fi (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as space is concerned, when it is part of the science fiction story, it is mostly just a plot device. The story could just as easily be about Homer lost at sea or Huck floating down a river. This is especially true for most so-called science fiction TV shows. In fact, when a show tries to talk about (of course with many errors, inaccuracies, annoyances, but this is fiction) humans journey into space [imdb.com], or the commercialization of space [imdb.com], they get canceled quickly.
I think the interesting thing is that science fiction tends to promote understanding, knowledge, and then exploration. This is what NASA and other organizations are doing a very good job at. However, people get caught up in the idea of adventure and danger, which NASA is not do good at providing, nor should it be their job.
The love the odd space opera. OTOH, sometimes just thinking about what might happen if someone could predict the time of a persons death is enough for a wonderful sci-fi yarn.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, yes, the "the movie skewered the book" crowd. Starship Troopers the movie did not lampoon the book. It did an excellent job of ripping on what the book was most definitively not about. Go read some of Heinlein's essays. Read "Take Back Your Government"--if you can find a copy (apparently the American people don't care enough about the idea of participating in government to buy such a book). Read what he says about ST. And then tell me it's a love song to fascism.
Too many people read Stranger in the 60's and said "Ooooh, here's a remarkable model of what the world should be!" and then dove back to his previous novel to face major disillusionment...because it didn't fit their narrow conception of what Heinlein should be writing. The Starship Troopers movie missed the point. Entirely. It's a little kid pointing at the fully-clothed emporer and saying "he's naked!"
wow, bad attitude! (Score:4, Insightful)
What kind of attitude is that? I love the known space story and other work by Neiven but my gratitude to its creator does not extend to limiting what I or others do. How does anyone intend to "share the dream" like that? Why would anyone bother to contribute back ideas to someone who would step on them like this? It's a very supprising attitude from such an amusing author.
No one owns an idea. Once you tell it, it belongs to everyone. Telling people that they can't write stories about rat tailed cats is about as silly as telling people they can't write stories about elves. Your words are yours, a phrase might be a trademark, implementations might be protected, but the rest is fair game.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
Has any other fan of this movie noticed the gross similarities before the media in that movie, and CNN, Fox News, etc? I mean.. "SHOWDOWN IRAQ". Come on - today's media makes the war look like a movie trailer. Do you remember that scene in Starship Troopers "DO YOUR PART", with the kids squashing the bugs? Mirror that in people buying duct tape and plastic to "be prepared" in the event of terrorism. It freaks the hell out of me.
How about the rest of us? (Score:3, Insightful)
But of course, since everybody over there knows who he is, I guess I'm just an ignorant shithead.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't wish for anyone to chuck out their dreams. I'd just like some of the anti-NASA zealots to put their dreams into perspective. The common Joe is convinced that NASA is a farce of waste and mismanagement. This isn't the case, but the perception gives leverage to forces that oppose NASA and, by extension, institutional exploration altogether.
There are two groups of anti-NASA. The first group hates NASA because they harbor vague notions about how to do it "right." They believe NASA, with it's big budget programs such as the Space Shuttle, is the reason that progress is slow. The second group hates NASA because NASA consumes resources that they would rather have for other, mostly "social", agendas. The problem is that when the first group sounds off, they give ammunition to the second group. I don't like this because I believe progress is slow because the task is hard, not because NASA sucks, and NASA doesn't need either group ankle-bitting it, much less both. Destroying NASA isn't going to create a better NASA, it's just going to get more food stamps bought.
Next year Cassini will reach Saturn. It will drop a probe onto the surface of Titan. We will learn more about Saturn than has ever been known. That which we learn will constitute the domain of knowledge about Saturn that anyone reading this will ever have the opportunity to know prior to death. Cassini is considered an old-fashioned "big budget" mission according to contemporary anti-NASA zealot thinking. Will there be more? God forbid!
Want something to dream of that you have a rational basis for suspecting may be feasible in your lifetime? Here are mine; detecting extra-terrestrial intelligent life and creating machine based non-human intelligence. The first is a matter of fate and possibly some luck. The second I consider an inevitability and I'm only left to wonder about timing. I too have my dreams. I just try a little harder to keep reality in perspective. The physics involved in space exploration precludes most of what our imaginations are capable of. This isn't NASA's fault so I figure it's best not to blame them for it.
Re:Paper Copies (Score:2, Insightful)
Some of my books are more than fifty years old, and my parents have some that are seventy-five. I've heard of some lasting hundreds. Also, they never seem to need upgrading to newer more featureful versions.
My books also have a universal EULA (not so much an agreement as a law, though) that applies nearly everywhere in the world. And I can make backup copies for my own use. I can even use small parts of the book in derivitive works if I choose.
And, of course, there is no problem with obsolete formats. My books are mostly American English, and I speak and read several dialicts of English, so no problem. Best of all, if I find a book in a format that I can't read, I can just give myself an upgrade and the book reads just fine.
The only real limitations I've found with books is that they require outside lighting and most book compression schemes are lossy. I truly wonder if there will ever be a technology as useful, enduring, and adapative as a book.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:5, Insightful)
For the most part, you're right, but for Mars, I respectfully disagree.
A freshman geology student with a pickaxe, a shovel, and an hour's worth of oxygen could teach us more about Martian history than any robotic sample return mission we have on the drawing board.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
None of those books would make good movies. Movies and books are competely different art forms. It's like saying, "I have to admit I'd love to see Beethoven's Ninth Symphony as a painting, but only if it was done right.
But the lesson from The Lord Of The Rings is that will never happen.
Actually, the lesson from The Lord of the Rings is that a good book has to be adapted in order to make it a good movie. Unless your idea of the perfect Lord of the Rings movie would have been forty-one hours of Tolkein himself sitting in a chair reading the book to you.
Re:Regarding the last two questions (Score:3, Insightful)
"Costner methodically removed any trace of the Sci Fi elements present in the original book, and dumbed down the dialogue so much that I almost walked out in the first 30 minutes."
so apperently it takes 30 minutes to drain ones will power and common sense...
I hadn't read the postman, and I hateed the movie. As a counter to Nivens point, I didn't read the postman because of the movie.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that there needs to be an adaptation, and a paragraph-by-paragraph text to movie transformation would not work. I actually mostly liked the Lord Of The Rings - Fellowship Of The Ring. That was an adaptation - Jackson made cuts, but stuck to the story line. He was in his "Smeagol" mode.
But The Two Towers wasn't an adaptation, it was a rewrite. It should have been called: The Two Towers: A Movie Inspired By The Lord Of The Rings. Jackson went into "Gollum" mode made all sorts of totally unneeded changes in the plot, dialog, and characters. He didn't just make cuts, he added unnecessary stuff that wasn't even in the original books! The resulting "plot" doesn't even make sense. Bah.
I have to admit my idea of the perfect Lord Of The Rings movie would be to film almost every scene and with a minimum of adaptation, and almost no changes to the dialog. The significant change I'd make would be to film the "flashback" stuff (like most of the Council Of Elrond) and not just have Aragorn, Gandalf, Elrond, and the rest sitting around the table talking to each other, and present a lot of that before the real beginning of the book and Bilbo's Birthday party.
But it would be very long, too long for a movie. Perhaps it could be done as a TV series - one years worth of 1 hour episodes, one per week.
Anyway, unless it could be produced quite cheaply it would never be a commercial success, so I don't expect to see it in my lifetime.
To get back on topic (i.e. Niven, Ringworld, and movies...) I do think that most books would be better adapted to a 8 to 40 hour TV series than jammed into a 2 hour movie.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:5, Insightful)
The first thought that popped into my head when I was the first "Countdown:Iraq" ad was:
"My good, they're going to be doing a "pregame" show of the war."
And that's exactly what it is. A pregame show, just like for the Superbowl or something.
Totally irrespective of the merits/demerits of the war itself the fact that we can, as a culture, promologate and tolerate such a thing is just mind boggling to me.
It makes my skin crawl just thinking about it.
And it certainly makes some of the futures hypothesised by such as Heinlein, Niven and Huxley look that much more like prediction.
KFG
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:2, Insightful)
There was a
Perhaps they HAVE been here, took a good look at us and decided they'd check up on us when we've matured a bit more.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of us have more than vague ideas for improvements. Substantive proposals for reform have been made -- frequently by people who have real knowledge of what's going on in the field. One friend who still works at NASA complains about increasingly bureaucratic management getting in the way. Shifting back to a more flexible management style such as was once practiced isn't a vague proposal. Encouraging independence and the free flow of communications aren't vague proposals.
Yes, things revealed by this group can provide ammunition to the people who want to simply destroy NASA. But suppressing bad news isn't healthy for an organization in anything but the shortest term. People once assumed that totalitarian dictatorships would best open democracies because they didn't "waste time" on debate or allow "internal critics" to weaken the state. It turned out that the problems ignored were sufficient to weaken the totalitarian states.
NASA is far from a totalitarian state. But similar principles do apply. You can't solve problems until they are known and widely discussed. The more people who look at a problem, the more likely you'll find a solution.
Yes, Cassini looks to be a success. And some of the "better, faster, cheaper" approaches have been notable failures. Goldin made severe mistakes. So did his predecessors. And I agree that the critics make some too. That's why I favor getting as many people involved as possible. Openness and flexibility are what we need -- not dogma of one variety or another.
Yes, physics does argue against things like Star Trek fantasies. That doesn't mean we're not able to do a wide variety of remarkable things in space. Physicists far better than I think things like space colonies and even travel to other stars are possible. Some even think them likely. The Fermi Paradox is still a debated topic. And, given that present day aerospace does have significant management problems, we don't need to invoke ideas that "physics is against it" to explain the failures that we see.
"Hard wired"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Huh? I thought one of the key attributes of intelligence is learning and adaptability, the very opposite of hardwiring. The higher-up you get in intelligence on Earth, the less hard-wiring you see. A foal can walk within minutes of birth; a human baby takes several months minimum.
On the other hand, a human can learn Irish dancing, karate, rock climbing, roller skating, ice skating, and driving. An unusually smart horse might be able to learn one, but an average human, given training, could become competent in all of 'em.
Humans even rewire their brains in fundamental ways. We have deep wiring, apparently, to learn spoken language, but we can train those parts of our brain to read writing, and sign language. Helen Keller learned to communicate by touch. I don't know of any animal besides primates that have learned to communicate in other than their "natural" channels.
Humans show wide varieties of behavior in extremely fundamental bodily functions; bathroom habits differ somewhat (my poor wife learning to use those Eastern toilets...) but our sleeping habits differ more, our eating habits differ substantially, and our sexual habits perhaps most of all.
I don't buy it. An 'older' species, that has had longer to develop, would seem likely to have even more variation in sexual habits and most other areas.
Re:Good SF and bad movies... (Score:3, Insightful)
Or people pouring out bottles of French wine in the streets because the French _dared_ to disagree with us about something! We helped them out in WWII! Don't they know we own their souls for the rest of eternity?
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, it's a long shot, but IF IT DOES HAPPEN, we sure as heck need to be established somewhere else.
The longevity of the SPECIES is at stake, and methinks that alone is a pretty damn good reason.
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:3, Insightful)
Flash Crowd and the Slashdot Effect. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Maybe what we're up against is the universe (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're referring to the Challenger explosion, then I should probably say that there were repeated objections from plenty of people saying that it was too cold to launch, but somewhere in the beauraucracy somebody decided that they would launch anyway for political reasons. The same beaureaucracy buried complaints about the shuttle safety which culminated in Columbia's disaster.
I think NASA should get back to research. [xprize.org]