"The Feeling Of Power" by Isaac Asimov
downlode.org
downlode.org
To be fair, the story talks more about computers designing other computers. Once we get into that realm we get to the point where the product produced is not entirely understood.
When we get to the point that computers are designing computers, the creators of the evolutionary algorithms used don't necessarily understand the output that their creations are producing.
In terms of C programmers, the programmers themselves might not understand, but they have the ability to investigate if they want to, and the compiler designers at least understand the output of their creation. When evolutionary algorithms are used to design something, we can't always grasp why the output works, we just know that it does.
Both very relevant, and slightly humorous where we surpassed the technology in the stories. A computer weighs more than two humans! And still has crippled computing power. Makes me smile every time.
*Edit: Asimov probably imagined our missiles looking like this: http://www.yellow-llama.com/wp-content/uploads/harddrive.jpg . That dish washer being the hard drive (is actually a hard drive). And minus the humans inside.
And farming is only 1 or 2 generations removed. Give it a few more turns, and one can easily see the world in the story becoming a reality.
In aerodynamics as applied to jet aircraft they have something called the coffin corner, a speed so close to the limits of the flight envelope in all directions that a small change in velocity will make you either stall or break up.
It's possible that there is such a thing as 'societies coffin corner', a speed of development so great that if it gets exceeded by a little or drops for a short time that we'll literally crash.
So the situation described in the story is already here, in some respects.
[Edit] Seriously, I used to buy 2nd-hand short story books to get to stories like this (which I've read), but if it has a wider readership this way, but people buy novels, maybe that's copyright's intent?
I don't see how protecting Asmiov's work after his death is in any way supposed to inspire him to create more works (he's already dead). And I highly doubt that Asimov cared whether or not his works would be under copyright once he was dead and buried. The only real reason for works to be protected past death is to the benefit of corporations not to the benefit of the general public or the artists/creators themselves.
That said, the current copyright laws are pretty ridiculous. Creator's life + 10 years would be more than enough, I reckon, instead of life + 50 or whatever it is.
Just because Asimov (may have) wished for his children to rake in money off the royalties of his works, doesn't necessarily mean that he (or they) are entitled to such a thing.
One somewhat interesting counterargument: if Asimov had been a grocer, he could have left his children a chain of profitable stores. Why should a writer's legacy to his children be less than a grocer's? If he had created a bank, an advertising agency or a law firm, these too might have outlived him, and no one would question his right to pass his stake down to his family.
I don't necessarily buy that argument, because income from creative works is purely residual in nature, and has no special value in the hands of anyone but the original author (except for whatever a publisher can continue to milk from it.) It's not as if a dead author can experience further incentive to create.
Consider that "Last Lecture" professor, Randy Pausch. He spent some of his last days working on a book. Should the surviving family be denied proceeds? Should his author's advance have been much smaller?
That is; if you believe money is an important incentive for creators, you can't overly penalize people who expect to die before all the returns are in.
You're still free to believe that all copyright is bad, or given too long a term, of course.
Let's not even delve into the 'reverse-copyright extensions' that happen when they apply copyright extensions to works in the past that have already fallen into the public domain... How is pulling something that was created 50+ years ago (with the author dead and gone) back into copyright supposed to 'inspire the arts' in any way, shape or form.