Hacker News Reader

Comment by jackcosgrove | Hacker News Reader

Is there a genre of science fiction that deliberately tries to downplay the amount of change that will occur between now and the future? Would it just be unpopular so no one tries?

Call it staticpunk or something to jazz it up.

View on HN

Most of it does? Just about anything talking about a century from now or longer?

In general, SF overestimates the short term change but dramatically underestimates the long term change.

IIRC Alain Dalmasio talks about this a lot and tried to readjust how his SF anticipates changes.

Sometimes. A lot of SF assumes FTL travel, which we have no reason to think will ever be possible (and even less possible when you realize they also are assuming to time dilation effects).

Yeah. I think it is because most SF is not actually about predicting the future, but analyzing modern society. So, they take modern society and make one or two big changes that allow the author to discuss their thing.

If they correctly account for long term change, especially after introducing their big twist, then they won’t have a society that reflects modern society, it will just be totally alien.

I think it mostly estimates the wrong changes. Sci fi from the first half of the twentieth century overshot in its predictions of universal flying cars and interstellar travel, but generally missed the internet or the idea that women would be in any way involved in the science. And it's amazing just how many plots up until the end of the last century assume mobile communication isn't routine

It’s not really a movie but a vibe, the movie Her does a really good job of “more of the same”. It’s obviously a different time than our own but things largely look the same. I liked it as it gave it this really anachronistic future vibe, like fashion had gone back to 70s styles and nobody has a tv, but it’s actually because projections have gotten so good that everyone’s phone is just a projector on the wall. Hidden technology.

The Worldwar series from Harry Turtledove plays this from an alien perspective. A big, powerful and very stable alien empire sends a probe to Earth, the probe sees knights fighting on horseback. Perfect, our next target! When their sublight invasion fleet finally arrives, the second world war is in a full swing - and humans don't really use knights anymore.

I remember Steven Spielberg's Extant series kind of made a realistic effort in this direction.

Rather then pretend that the future is the Jetson's they made houses still look like houses, with house interiors that you would recognize today. However there is Future tech still just embedded or hidden away, unless you go into the labs etc.

There is actually an expectation that any movie that happens in the future to be a SciFi one. I we _do_ expect some sort of change from today. Either mad max style, terminator style or expanse style other more positive ones, you name it. But would be quite unexpected to make a movie, set to 2094 and everything looks the same. We just know, as a civilization, that something changes.

But I expect in 2094 we still live in the same houses, work on the land, enjoy sun and the sea, maybe still employed, but some change will be happening.

It would make an interesting plot point - like the main characters discovering the no-development stasis is artificially maintained. Or alternatively that there is an illusion of progress, yen thing never actually change for some reason.

I think there is a lot of it but it is not a specific genre.

There is quite a lot that focuses on one, or a linked series of changes, but to highlight those it plays down other possible changes. I think a lot of near future hard SF does this. The problem is its obsolete 20 years later!

I want someone to lampoon tech problems of today still existing in the future. Sorry, we've gotta push software updates iOS 186.3 which will require 30 minutes.

Isn't that just fiction, then?

2nd-order-punk

Reply on news.ycombinator.com