And who among us cannot sympathize with Albert Brock, The Murderer? https://www.readkong.com/page/the-murderer-by-ray-bradbury-8...
The transistor was invented in 1947 and the first fully transistorized radio wasn't available until a year after Bradbury published this, but he got all the way through predicting ringtones, smartwatches, housing automation, GPS digital dispatch/gig economy jobs, and smarmy digital assistants in the span of a single story.
I am not aware of a more prescient bit of science fiction. Bradbury knew how people worked and what we'd try to make.
If you haven't read The Murderer, please do so.
Makes you wonder if Bradbury wasn't a real life John Titor.
I thought I had a decent grasp of science fiction classics of that era. After reading the story, I too am baffled, both by my having missed this story, and in the same way you are.
>I am not aware of a more prescient bit of science fiction. Bradbury knew how people worked and what we'd try to make.
While not a start-to-finish prophecy like "The Murderer", from Wikipedia's article on Robert Heinlein's Space Cadet:
>The novel contains an early description of a mobile phone:
>>Matt dug a candy bar out of his pouch, split it and gave half to Jarman, who accepted it gratefully. "You're a pal, Matt, I've been living on my own fat ever since breakfast -- and that's risky. Say, your telephone is sounding. "Oh!" Matt fumbled in his pouch and got out his phone. "Hello?"
>The phone "was limited by its short range to the neighborhood of an earth-side [i.e. terrestrial] relay office".
I especially find this part insightful:
>A cadet avoids having to talk to his family while traveling by packing his phone in luggage.
I'm not certain it is, but The Santaroga Barrier by Frank Herbert has a rather interesting excerpt:
>To those men in their oddly similar dark suits, their cold eyes weighing and dismissing everything, the people of this valley were a foe to be defeated. As he thought of it, Dasein realized all customers were "The Enemy" to these men. Davidson and his kind were pitted against each other, yes, competitive, but among themselves they betrayed that they were pitted more against the masses who existed beyond that inner ring of knowledgeable financial operation.
>The alignment was apparent in everything they did, in their words as well as their actions. They spoke of "package grab level" and "container flash time" -- of "puff limit" and "acceptance threshold." It was an "in" language of militarylike maneuvering and combat. They knew which height on a shelf was most apt to make a customer grab an item. They knew the "flash time" -- the shelf width needed for certain containers. They knew how much empty air could be "puffed" into a package to make it appear a greater bargain. they knew how much price and package manipulation the customer would accept without jarring him into a "rejection pattern."
>*And we're their spies, Dasein thought. the psychiatrists and psychologists - all the "social scientists" we're the espionage arm.*
The Santaroga Barrier,
Frank Herbert, 1968
The way that tech uses "dark patterns" to keep us glued to our phones, and use fairly advanced science to do it, was sort of called out if not predicted.
I thank you for the referral.
Stand on Zanzibar (1968)
Bradbury was predicting that we'd have smaller slices of attention available, that we would choose to hyper-stimulate ourselves 24/7 and not choose to protect our time for quiet contemplation. That every moment would be filled with either important work messages or advertisements.
Bradbury doesn't even predict a way that this causes secondary harm. He just says "hey, this is how the future will look and some people won't be wild about it."
He nails it. That's exactly what our world looks like now.
His protagonist isn't a fan, probably Bradbury isn't a fan, but the explicit message is that most people will be in favor. If they weren't then we wouldn't have this kind of world.
So, ok, we can all decide what we think about that. The protagonist decides to destroy his company's equipment. The psychiatrist moves back to a life of notifications and buzzing. Life goes on and society continues to work.
The story is morally neutral. It isn't a complaint; that's the beauty of it. Bradbury is one of the few authors who often tried to achieve that kind of neutrality.
Bradbury's writing is many things, but morally neutral it is not. Throughout almost all of his books is a morality that looks very skeptically at change, and a tendency to predict any trend into slippery slope. His prose and storytelling is fantastic and as a counterbalance to more optimistic authors of the time like Heinlein his works are great, but Bradbury writes from a very distinct viewpoint.
A much more neutral older SF author, IMO, is Le Guin. She does a great job of bringing up complex ideas and not picking sides.
These same historical ills attributed to all of these activities are being recycled against today's social media, even here on HN.
It is an ever accelerating trend away from in person socialization and towards solitary entertainment and electronically mediated, soloed interactions.
Not everybody does.
Not everyone finds socializing with the same clique of 5-10 people day after day after day to be a valuable experience. Especially when you're not the "star" of the social cliques you find yourself in.