The best human future in science fiction?

[The Zygon]

All,

I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

I would like to hear the opinions of others.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

What do you feel the social structure of the 'Next Generation' shows
was? We don't really see or hear much about exactly what it was and
much of what we do get is contradictory.

[The Zygon]

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

What do you feel the social structure of the 'Next Generation' shows
was? We don't really see or hear much about exactly what it was and
much of what we do get is contradictory.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

The world building in Star Trek is fuzzy in many ways and even contradictory, I agree. But they seem to suggest that human beings were motivated largely by building reputations and following their dreams. People who liked the idea of making food for other people to eat, opened restaurants. They prided themselves by people patronizing their restaurant. Not by how much money they made because no one paid them. People who want to explore the universe joined star fleet. So did people who wanted to protect the human race as a whole, and so on. The goal was to be thought of as a person who is making a welcome contribution to society.

This notion of reputation being a big motivator for human action is not without precedent in actual history. During the period known as The Enlightenment in Europe, the Natural Philosophers worked mainly to build reputations, spending their own money lavishly to do so. It was not until the Industrial Revolution that Science began to produce technology with enough regularity to become to be seen as a path to building a fortune.

Naturally, this reputation hunting was done by the moneyed classes who had already solved the problem of scarcity on a personal level.

[David Johnston]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

You have no idea what their social structure was. Me, every time
someone talks about how the Federation is "post-scarcity" I just
remember that Vash couldn't afford a ticket off-world.

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

That's because they're programmed to not want such things.

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

You have no idea what their social structure was. Me, every time
someone talks about how the Federation is "post-scarcity" I just
remember that Vash couldn't afford a ticket off-world.

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

That's because they're programmed to not want such things.

Episodes "The Neutral Zone" - with cryogenic humans from the
20th century - and "The Schizoid Man" consider the ethics of
life extension. In "The Neutral Zone", Riker and Picard both
criticise Data for rescuing the corpsicles from a doomed ship -
on the grounds that they were dead and could be left; that
they'd been frozen with the hope of revival wasn't relevant.
I don't want to make the mistake of supposing that a few lines
in a script represent careful world-building by Roddenberry.
"The Neutral Zone" also gives the revived an idea of how they
can live in the twenty-fourth century.

A different take on frozen goods is the 1960s episode "Space Seed".

[The Zygon]

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

You have no idea what their social structure was. Me, every time
someone talks about how the Federation is "post-scarcity" I just
remember that Vash couldn't afford a ticket off-world.

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

That's because they're programmed to not want such things.

As I said above, there were indeed many contradictory elements in the overall story arc. But Vash was on a non-Federation world. On a Federation world there would be no one for her to pay or currency with which to do so.

In _Voyager_ we learned that Anika's parents got a ship by persuading star fleet to support a study of theirs without them being themselves part of star fleet. We also found out there were people who did not really care for star fleet but had to join anyway, in order to be able to travel off world. So they were not truly "post scarcity". They were really "post poverty".

[-dsr-]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.

They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.

One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

-dsr-

[Quadibloc]

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?

And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.

Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down the list
of priorities.

But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't have that.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.
Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down the list
of priorities.
But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't have that.

An android industrial revolution would eliminate the need
for the cast to go and have adventures every week. But
arguably the androids couldn't be let loose without also
letting them turn the galaxy into a safe, peaceful, boring
place for a stagnant humanity.

If Klingons have a basic biological need to be antagonistic -
likewise Kazon and Hirogen - is that found in humans as well?

[The Zygon]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.
Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down the list
of priorities.
But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't have that.
John Savard

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still have a pretty standard looking cranium.

[larry]

Post by The Zygon

Post by Quadibloc

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.
Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down the list
of priorities.
But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't have that.
John Savard

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?

[The Zygon]

Post by larry

Post by The Zygon

Post by Quadibloc

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.
Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down the list
of priorities.
But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't have that.
John Savard

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?
--
After investigation, believe that which you have yourselves
tested and found reasonable, and which is for your good
and that of others.
Gautama.

Unfortunately, I do not remember. Do you have a book reference?

[Wolffan]

Post by larry

Post by Quadibloc

Post by -dsr-
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly
having
multiple pathways to ascending.

It's bad enough that they have to put funny foreheads on the Klingons now
thanks
to the movies having a bigger budget. Giving all the humans bulging craniums?
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.
Not only are they reluctant to increase their own intelligence, but
they're even
unwilling to filch advanced technology. Once Kirk had bent the androids in "I,
Mudd" to his will, one would have expected that his first act would be to get
them to give the Federation all their technology without strings attached.
Making a unique prison for Harry Mudd would be rather much farther down
the list
of priorities.
But if Federation ships could zip around the galaxy at Warp 11... oops, wrong
episode... they would run rings around the Klingons, and one couldn't
have that.
John Savard

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line
which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program
to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever
been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems
mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in
music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of
them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still
have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?
--
After investigation, believe that which you have yourselves
tested and found reasonable, and which is for your good
and that of others.
Gautama.

Unfortunately, I do not remember. Do you have a book reference?

Cetaganda, Captain Vorpatril’s Alliance, and Diplomatic Immunity have major
Cetagandan presence up front. Most of the other Mad Miles Vorkostigan books
mention Cetaganda at least in passing, if only for the backstory. The
Cetagandan Invasion is an important part of at least one sub-plot in A civil
Campaign and The Warrior’s Apprentice.

[Greg Goss]

Post by larry

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line
which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program
to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever
been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems
mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in
music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of
them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still
have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?

Unfortunately, I do not remember. Do you have a book reference?

Cetaganda, Captain Vorpatril’s Alliance, and Diplomatic Immunity have major
Cetagandan presence up front. Most of the other Mad Miles Vorkostigan books
mention Cetaganda at least in passing, if only for the backstory. The
Cetagandan Invasion is an important part of at least one sub-plot in A civil
Campaign and The Warrior’s Apprentice.

The Cetagandans have designed for themselves a caste system. Other
than Cetaganda, and to a lesser extent Diplomatic Immunity, the other
references only recognize the military caste. The ruling caste, and
the neuter bio-experiments caste are the other two that we see. I
assume Zygon is talking about the ruling caste.

[The Zygon]

Post by Greg Goss

Post by Wolffan

Post by larry

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line
which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program
to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever
been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems
mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in
music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of
them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still
have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?

Unfortunately, I do not remember. Do you have a book reference?

Cetaganda, Captain Vorpatril’s Alliance, and Diplomatic Immunity have major
Cetagandan presence up front. Most of the other Mad Miles Vorkostigan books
mention Cetaganda at least in passing, if only for the backstory. The
Cetagandan Invasion is an important part of at least one sub-plot in A civil
Campaign and The Warrior’s Apprentice.

The Cetagandans have designed for themselves a caste system. Other
than Cetaganda, and to a lesser extent Diplomatic Immunity, the other
references only recognize the military caste. The ruling caste, and
the neuter bio-experiments caste are the other two that we see. I
assume Zygon is talking about the ruling caste.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

Entirely by coincidence, everytime I start a book by Bujold, something else which I want to read more, captures my attention. The whole Vorsagian series is on my "reread" list, even though I have never finished any of them.

[Moriarty]

On Monday, March 12, 2018 at 4:10:32 PM UTC+11, The Zygon wrote:

<snip>

Post by The Zygon
Entirely by coincidence, everytime I start a book by Bujold, something else
which I want to read more, captures my attention. The whole Vorsagian
series is on my "reread" list, even though I have never finished any of them.

You really should finish "Barrayar". Cordelia's shopping trip occurs in the last few pages and is worth reading.

-Moriarty

[The Zygon]

Post by Moriarty
<snip>

Post by The Zygon
Entirely by coincidence, everytime I start a book by Bujold, something else
which I want to read more, captures my attention. The whole Vorsagian
series is on my "reread" list, even though I have never finished any of them.

You really should finish "Barrayar". Cordelia's shopping trip occurs in the last few pages and is worth reading.
-Moriarty

Thanks. Will do. It will be the first one I re-read. I was planning to start with _Diplomatic Immunity_. But I just changed my mind.

[larry]

Post by Greg Goss

Post by larry

You can do boosted intelligence without bulging craniums. One story line
which I have never seen, but I think I would enjoy reading, is a program
to identify all the genes connected to every kind of savant there has ever
been. Perfect recall, ability to solve huge mathematical problems
mentally, ability to speak multiple languages, prodigy level skill in
music, mathematics etc, and find a way for all human beings to have all of
them. Such a human would be almost supernaturally intelligent and still
have a pretty standard looking cranium.

Bujold's Cetaganians, eh?

Unfortunately, I do not remember. Do you have a book reference?

Cetaganda, Captain Vorpatril?s Alliance, and Diplomatic Immunity have major
Cetagandan presence up front. Most of the other Mad Miles Vorkostigan books
mention Cetaganda at least in passing, if only for the backstory. The
Cetagandan Invasion is an important part of at least one sub-plot in A civil
Campaign and The Warrior?s Apprentice.

The Cetagandans have designed for themselves a caste system. Other
than Cetaganda, and to a lesser extent Diplomatic Immunity, the other
references only recognize the military caste. The ruling caste, and
the neuter bio-experiments caste are the other two that we see. I
assume Zygon is talking about the ruling caste.

The hands that rock the cradle rule the empire, Cetaganian
children are gestated in uterine replicators after their genotypes are
vetted/edited by the haut ladies on Ceta Prime.

[David DeLaney]

Post by Quadibloc
And this would mean they couldn't do idiot plots any more, as well.

Oh, soooo not true. "Higher intelligence", as we've seen many times in real
life and even multiple times on this here newsfroup, is no guarantee against
holding the idiot ball.

Dave, but it IS true that writing plots for higher-intelligence beings takes
exponentially more time, if you're really using "show, don't tell"

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I

have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep
Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think
that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the
problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.

Gene Roddenberry was an idealist and a peacenik. I knew him
tangentially through Bjo Trimble and Star Trek fandom, and (at
Bjo's suggestion) I, living in Berkeley, went onto Telegraph
Avenue and bought him a peace symbol. It made him very happy.

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the

technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

Extra-long life is generally considered to be not an unmixed
blessing. There's a novel just out about a man with a lifespan
some 15 times that of the average human:

https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-to-stop-time-by-matt-haig-reviewed.html

The protagonist's modus vivendi consists of Keep moving, Don't
attract attention, and Never fall in love.

I would like to live longer than I expect to, but only if it
doesn't involve getting senile, as my grandfather did; he lived
to be 90 and near-witless.

[D B Davis]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I

have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep
Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think
that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the
problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.

Gene Roddenberry was an idealist and a peacenik. I knew him
tangentially through Bjo Trimble and Star Trek fandom, and (at
Bjo's suggestion) I, living in Berkeley, went onto Telegraph
Avenue and bought him a peace symbol. It made him very happy.

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the

technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

Extra-long life is generally considered to be not an unmixed
blessing. There's a novel just out about a man with a lifespan
https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-to-stop-time-by-matt-haig-reviewed.html
The protagonist's modus vivendi consists of Keep moving, Don't
attract attention, and Never fall in love.
I would like to live longer than I expect to, but only if it
doesn't involve getting senile, as my grandfather did; he lived
to be 90 and near-witless.

On my to-be-read shelf sits the German edition of _Momo_ (Ende, 1973).
_Momo_'s at the trail head of one artistic path that leads to a movie
released in 2011 called _In Time_. This particular path goes from _Momo_
to "Time Is Money" (Falk, 1975) to the 1985 movie _The Price of Life_
and finally to the 2011 movie.
_In Time_'s Fed uses time instead of greenbacks. Wealthy people have
all of the time in the world, which they steal from the working poor.
Your banked time decrements and you stop aging at the age of twenty-
five. When you run out of time, you die.
There's a wealthy guy at the start of the movie with over a century
of time banked. The guy's already centuries old when he proclaims that
people just need to die after one lifetime, him too.
The protagonist in _Healer_ (Wilson) is virtually immortal. The
story's undercurrent is that it can be hell to go on living while
those around you die.
That premise also appears at the start of _Time Enough for Love_
(RAH). Unfortunately, your eight deadly words appeared to me after about
a hundred pages into the Heinlein.
Bjo's an interesting name. Bee-Joe? Speaking of Bjo and Roddenberry,
this world desperately needs more peaceniks and less military-
industrial-congressional-complex.

Thank you,

--
Don

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by D B Davis

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I

have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep
Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think
that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the
problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.

Gene Roddenberry was an idealist and a peacenik. I knew him
tangentially through Bjo Trimble and Star Trek fandom, and (at
Bjo's suggestion) I, living in Berkeley, went onto Telegraph
Avenue and bought him a peace symbol. It made him very happy.

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the

technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

Extra-long life is generally considered to be not an unmixed
blessing. There's a novel just out about a man with a lifespan
https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-to-stop-time-by-matt-haig-reviewed.html
The protagonist's modus vivendi consists of Keep moving, Don't
attract attention, and Never fall in love.
I would like to live longer than I expect to, but only if it
doesn't involve getting senile, as my grandfather did; he lived
to be 90 and near-witless.

On my to-be-read shelf sits the German edition of _Momo_ (Ende, 1973).
_Momo_'s at the trail head of one artistic path that leads to a movie
released in 2011 called _In Time_. This particular path goes from _Momo_
to "Time Is Money" (Falk, 1975) to the 1985 movie _The Price of Life_
and finally to the 2011 movie.
_In Time_'s Fed uses time instead of greenbacks. Wealthy people have
all of the time in the world, which they steal from the working poor.
Your banked time decrements and you stop aging at the age of twenty-
five. When you run out of time, you die.
There's a wealthy guy at the start of the movie with over a century
of time banked. The guy's already centuries old when he proclaims that
people just need to die after one lifetime, him too.
The protagonist in _Healer_ (Wilson) is virtually immortal. The
story's undercurrent is that it can be hell to go on living while
those around you die.
That premise also appears at the start of _Time Enough for Love_
(RAH). Unfortunately, your eight deadly words appeared to me after about
a hundred pages into the Heinlein.

I couldn't get into that one either.

Digression: this is my strictly personal take on what Heinlein is
worth reading:

Anything before 1964 = good, except for _Stranger in a Strange
Land,_ first third good, second two-thirds bad
_Farnham's Freehold_, 1964 = bad
_The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_, 1966 = good
Anything after 1966 = bad, bad, bad

Post by D B Davis
Bjo's an interesting name. Bee-Joe?

Yes, that's how it's pronounced.

It's a contraction of Betty Joann. She's very well-known in
fandom, and organized the Save Star Trek protests back in the
sixties.

[Steve Coltrin]

begin fnord

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the

technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

Extra-long life is generally considered to be not an unmixed
blessing. There's a novel just out about a man with a lifespan
https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-to-stop-time-by-matt-haig-reviewed.html
The protagonist's modus vivendi consists of Keep moving, Don't
attract attention, and Never fall in love.

Most or all of those would be less necessary if _everyone_ lived as long
as they wanted to, though.

[Default User]

Post by Steve Coltrin
begin fnord

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the

technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

Extra-long life is generally considered to be not an unmixed
blessing. There's a novel just out about a man with a lifespan

https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-to-stop-time-by-matt-haig-reviewed.html

Post by Steve Coltrin

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
The protagonist's modus vivendi consists of Keep moving, Don't
attract attention, and Never fall in love.

Most or all of those would be less necessary if everyone lived as long
as they wanted to, though.

This season of the TV show "LUcifer" has featured the biblical Cain
(although the closed captioning spells it "Kane"). He's been condemned
to wander the Earth and is pretty bored, so trying to figure out how to
die. Considering that his brother has spent the same length of time
being tortured in Hell[1], I think he made out pretty well.


1. Although Hell doesn't sound all that bad. I thought in the first
season that it described like the more typical physical,
sitz-bath-of-lava type stuff. Now you just relive your guilt over and
over. And you can leave whenever you're ready.

[The Zygon]

On 2018-03-02, The Zygon <

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

[David Johnston]

Post by The Zygon

On 2018-03-02, The Zygon <

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

[The Zygon]

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

On 2018-03-02, The Zygon <

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

[Titus G]

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

On 2018-03-02, The Zygon <

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

[J. Clarke]

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

On 2018-03-02, The Zygon <

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Except for one big difference. The Minds aren't _stupid_.

[The Zygon]

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

Post by -dsr-

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Jimmy Carter was royalty? In any case, America is not the whole human race. In several democracies, it is actually quite difficult for rich people to get elected. This may seem hard to believe in America. But it is true just the same.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Post by The Zygon

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

Post by -dsr-

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Jimmy Carter was royalty? In any case, America is not the whole human race. In several democracies, it is actually quite difficult for rich people to get elected. This may seem hard to believe in America. But it is true just the same.

Just out of curiosity, what democracies do you have in mind where the
wealthy have a very hard time getting elected?

[The Zygon]

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by The Zygon

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

Post by -dsr-

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Jimmy Carter was royalty? In any case, America is not the whole human race. In several democracies, it is actually quite difficult for rich people to get elected. This may seem hard to believe in America. But it is true just the same.

Just out of curiosity, what democracies do you have in mind where the
wealthy have a very hard time getting elected?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

Britain. Canado, too, I think. Germany, to some extent. India, as well, if memory serves. Also, less consequential ones like the Caribbean democracies.

[J. Clarke]

On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 23:20:06 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by The Zygon

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

Post by -dsr-

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Jimmy Carter was royalty? In any case, America is not the whole human race. In several democracies, it is actually quite difficult for rich people to get elected. This may seem hard to believe in America. But it is true just the same.

Just out of curiosity, what democracies do you have in mind where the
wealthy have a very hard time getting elected?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

Britain. Canado, too, I think. Germany, to some extent. India, as well, if memory serves. Also, less consequential ones like the Caribbean democracies.

Do you have statistics to support this statement?

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by The Zygon

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by The Zygon

Post by Titus G

Post by The Zygon

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon

Post by -dsr-

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

The Culture is often described as a left-wing version of utopia; it might be
interesting to compare it to Neal Asher's right-wing version, The Polity.
They're extremely similar. Both are essentially ruled by AIs or Minds;
both provide for the basic needs of all citizens. The Culture also provides
for nearly everything else a citizen could want. The Polity seems to keep
an economy running for the sake of humans having something to do and letting
them stratify themselves into various socio-economic classes. In order to get
an interesting story, the authors need to place those stories at the edge or
beyond of civilized space.
One of the strangest things about the Federation is that they seem to
have avoided boosted-intelligence scenarios repeatedly, despite clearly having
multiple pathways to ascending.
-dsr-

_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

The Minds form them real government. The biological species are pets who them let pretend to have a say in things. It's something like a man walking his dog when the dog seems to insist. He is humoring the dog.

So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

Jimmy Carter was royalty? In any case, America is not the whole human race. In several democracies, it is actually quite difficult for rich people to get elected. This may seem hard to believe in America. But it is true just the same.

Just out of curiosity, what democracies do you have in mind where the
wealthy have a very hard time getting elected?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

Britain. Canado, too, I think. Germany, to some extent. India, as well, if memory serves. Also, less consequential ones like the Caribbean democracies.

Maybe what's being measured is the price of getting the
elected government to do what the rich people want,
versus rich people getting themselves elected to do their
own dirty work.

Why the U.S. has so many extremely bought politicians
and so many self-wealthy ones is going to need at least
some kind of a diagram to explain.

[Quadibloc]

Oh, you silly child. :)

All you need to do is have a look at how democracy developed in Great Britain.

The first step was the Magna Carta. That limited the King's autocratic
powers by enshrining the power of the nobility.

The House of Commons came later. At first, you had to own property to
vote, and to be independently wealthy to run, because MPs didn't have a salary.

Things changed some more when they looked over their shoulders at the French Revolution.

Change things all at once, and you get Haiti or Zimbabwe, not democracy.

The United States, what with its nuclear weapons and all, is just
moving to freedom at a more cautious pace than nations like Canada or
those of Europe, which have fewer responsibilities.

[The Zygon]

Post by Quadibloc
Oh, you silly child. :)
All you need to do is have a look at how democracy developed in Great Britain.
The first step was the Magna Carta. That limited the King's autocratic
powers by enshrining the power of the nobility.
The House of Commons came later. At first, you had to own property to
vote, and to be independently wealthy to run, because MPs didn't have a salary.
Things changed some more when they looked over their shoulders at the French Revolution.
Change things all at once, and you get Haiti or Zimbabwe, not democracy.
The United States, what with its nuclear weapons and all, is just
moving to freedom at a more cautious pace than nations like Canada or
those of Europe, which have fewer responsibilities.

This is pretty close to how I think about the matter.

Some author once said, "If you want to see what America is going to be in 50-75 years, see what Europe is now". That is intended to be a rolling 50-25 years. He claims that his has been so for over 140 years.

[David DeLaney]

Post by Titus G
So just like presidential democracy. Every 3 or 4 years Royalty compete
in a popularity contest. The Minds just replace Royalty and I say in a
happy voice, "Woof, woof woof, woof, woof ,woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof,
woof, woof."

... oh, are you related to Terry, then?

Dave, levels of intensity in communication

[Kevrob]

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon
_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

"Libertarian" has both a left-wing heritage, as a word that anarchists
of the left-wing (non-propertarian) variety have always used, especially
when calling yourself an anarchist would get you banged up in The Man's
prison, or worse. "Right-wing" anarchists, notably the anarcho-capitalsts
and propertarian libertarians,* are often not considered to be anarchists
by the members of the left tradition. By those lights, anyone who accepts
the idea of private property is on the Side of the Oppressor.

I have joked that it is "pick you Murray" - Bookchin or Rothbard?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard

Kevin R

* ObSF: The "Libertarian Party" of the world that Win Bear
lives in before encountering L. Neil Smith's "Probability Broach"
was called "the Propertarian Party."

[The Zygon]

Post by Kevrob

Post by David Johnston

Post by The Zygon
_The Culture_ is Libertarian with a capital "L". I see nothing left wing in the obsolescence of Government.

The Culture has a government. What it doesn't have is corporations or
money.

"Libertarian" has both a left-wing heritage, as a word that anarchists
of the left-wing (non-propertarian) variety have always used, especially
when calling yourself an anarchist would get you banged up in The Man's
prison, or worse. "Right-wing" anarchists, notably the anarcho-capitalsts
and propertarian libertarians,* are often not considered to be anarchists
by the members of the left tradition. By those lights, anyone who accepts
the idea of private property is on the Side of the Oppressor.
I have joked that it is "pick you Murray" - Bookchin or Rothbard?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard
Kevin R
* ObSF: The "Libertarian Party" of the world that Win Bear
lives in before encountering L. Neil Smith's "Probability Broach"
was called "the Propertarian Party."

All correct. But people who are called Libertarians today are not considered left wing. In a sense, Conservatives and Liberals have the same heritage. But that hardly explains their political stances of today.

[Quadibloc]

Post by The Zygon
In a sense, Conservatives and Liberals have the same heritage. But that hardly
explains their political stances of today.

Once one sorts out social conservatives from classical liberals, for a start, one
can explain, easily enough, the political stances of the various basic political
orientations. It's explaining how classical liberals and social conservatives
became strange bedfellows in one political party that needs explaining.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for
indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

That's likely a consequence of the human beings in Star Trek being portrayed by
actors who don't have indefinite lifespans. So the real-world makers of the show
didn't want to make problems for themselves - so they show, on multiple
occasions, explicit rejections of technologies that could prolong the human
lifespan indefinitely.

We are asked to believe that the people of the Star Trek future have achieved
such a peak of philosophical consciousness that they are willing to embrace
death without the crutch of a belief in an afterlife.

John Savard

[The Zygon]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by The Zygon
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for
indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.

That's likely a consequence of the human beings in Star Trek being portrayed by
actors who don't have indefinite lifespans. So the real-world makers of the show
didn't want to make problems for themselves - so they show, on multiple
occasions, explicit rejections of technologies that could prolong the human
lifespan indefinitely.
We are asked to believe that the people of the Star Trek future have achieved
such a peak of philosophical consciousness that they are willing to embrace
death without the crutch of a belief in an afterlife.
John Savard

It would surprise me if the limited lifespan of the authors had much to do with the story arc. They could easily handle that my making the time between episodes to be much longer. But if they did, and they wanted to portray a dynamic society, they would need to show the technology changing dramatically over the lifetime of the series.

As for the death of religion in human society, that is already happening in Western Europe and more gradually in the USA. The only places on earth where Christianity is seeing net growth is in Africa. Islam is seeing net growth almost entirely by population growth in Muslim countries.

[Titus G]

On 03/03/18 12:45, The Zygon wrote:
snip

As for the death of religion in human society, that is already happening in Western Europe and more gradually in the USA. snip

Scientology has expanded its property empire to Auckland, NZ.

[m***@sky.com]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I think most spacefaring civilizations have the advantage over us simply because their size means that they are more secure, and that they have been successful. I don't find late Star Trek convincing, and I think post-scarcity simply means that the writers don't understand the power of exponential growth. As a new structure of society I think Schmitz's Overgovernment, keeping loose rein on a collection of pretty free-wheeling planetary governments, is worthy of more consideration than it seems to get.

Perhaps we will end up with a somewhat computer-assisted capitalism. See the paper http://procaccia.info/papers/rent.pdf for a means of deciding how to split the rent of a shared house with rooms not of equal attractiveness which has some justification as the fairest possibly way given assumptions probably picked to make the problem tractable.

(Or David Drake's RCN series is right and politics is doomed to nothing more enlightened than Rome about the time of the Cataline conspiracy - damn!)

[The Zygon]

Post by m***@sky.com

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I think most spacefaring civilizations have the advantage over us simply because their size means that they are more secure, and that they have been successful. I don't find late Star Trek convincing, and I think post-scarcity simply means that the writers don't understand the power of exponential growth. As a new structure of society I think Schmitz's Overgovernment, keeping loose rein on a collection of pretty free-wheeling planetary governments, is worthy of more consideration than it seems to get.
Perhaps we will end up with a somewhat computer-assisted capitalism. See the paper http://procaccia.info/papers/rent.pdf for a means of deciding how to split the rent of a shared house with rooms not of equal attractiveness which has some justification as the fairest possibly way given assumptions probably picked to make the problem tractable.
(Or David Drake's RCN series is right and politics is doomed to nothing more enlightened than Rome about the time of the Cataline conspiracy - damn!)

I doubt that we can have the slightest clue as to what is right in prognostications about the far future. That is why I spoke more about what I liked, rather than what made most sense. I am not sure I would know how to decide what made most sense.

[Mike Van Pelt]

... In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next
Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ ...

A couple off the top of my head that seem like good places
to live, some with caveats:

Larry Niven's "Known Space", at least, later in the history.
Caveat: the ARMs. There's a definite need to stop those sorts
of folks who "just want to watch the world burn", but the ARMs
go beyond that by quite a bit.

If what you want to do doesn't involve things the ARMs care
about, it'd be a great place to live, though. And, really,
to make interesting stories in a real eutopia*, you need to
write it about the outlier who hits a problem.

James Schmitz's "Hub" worlds seem like mostly a pretty
good place to live, but sometimes more "exciting" than
comfortable. At least, in the stories, which need
excitement.


* explicitly rejecting Sir Thomas Moore's Greek pun here:
eutopia = good place; utopia = no place.

[The Zygon]

In article

... In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next
Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ ...

A couple off the top of my head that seem like good places
Larry Niven's "Known Space", at least, later in the history.
Caveat: the ARMs. There's a definite need to stop those sorts
of folks who "just want to watch the world burn", but the ARMs
go beyond that by quite a bit.
If what you want to do doesn't involve things the ARMs care
about, it'd be a great place to live, though. And, really,
to make interesting stories in a real eutopia*, you need to
write it about the outlier who hits a problem.
James Schmitz's "Hub" worlds seem like mostly a pretty
good place to live, but sometimes more "exciting" than
comfortable. At least, in the stories, which need
excitement.
eutopia = good place; utopia = no place.
--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

Most people in Known Space never interacted with the ARM. Or, at least, did not know when they did. They lived very peaceful, untroubled lives.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I am going for David Weber's Dahak series. A lifespan of 600 years with
significant levels of bio-enhancement based on one's position in life.
An human empire spanning thousands of light years. A
trans-materialization device capable of spanning those light years in an
instant. A society where everyone is needed to repopulate the Galaxy.
https://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/

Lynn

[The Zygon]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I am going for David Weber's Dahak series. A lifespan of 600 years with
significant levels of bio-enhancement based on one's position in life.
An human empire spanning thousands of light years. A
trans-materialization device capable of spanning those light years in an
instant. A society where everyone is needed to repopulate the Galaxy.
https://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/
Lynn

One that is culled every few hundred thousand years by an alien species. No thank you. And it makes little sense for there to be just two intelligent species. Some physicists once said that any number between 1 and infinity makes little sense when talking about naturally occurring phenomena. That makes sense to me. Either human beings are unique or there are lots of intelligent species.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by The Zygon

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I am going for David Weber's Dahak series. A lifespan of 600 years with
significant levels of bio-enhancement based on one's position in life.
An human empire spanning thousands of light years. A
trans-materialization device capable of spanning those light years in an
instant. A society where everyone is needed to repopulate the Galaxy.
https://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/
Lynn

One that is culled every few hundred thousand years by an alien species. No thank you. And it makes little sense for there to be just two intelligent species. Some physicists once said that any number between 1 and infinity makes little sense when talking about naturally occurring phenomena. That makes sense to me. Either human beings are unique or there are lots of intelligent species.

The Acchultani cull sometimes and sometimes they get culled. The first
two books are about the Acchultani and the third book is about the next
generation.

There are many other interplanetary species but the dadgum Acchultani
keep on culling them.

Lynn

[The Zygon]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I am going for David Weber's Dahak series. A lifespan of 600 years with
significant levels of bio-enhancement based on one's position in life.
An human empire spanning thousands of light years. A
trans-materialization device capable of spanning those light years in an
instant. A society where everyone is needed to repopulate the Galaxy.
https://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/
Lynn

One that is culled every few hundred thousand years by an alien species. No thank you. And it makes little sense for there to be just two intelligent species. Some physicists once said that any number between 1 and infinity makes little sense when talking about naturally occurring phenomena. That makes sense to me. Either human beings are unique or there are lots of intelligent species.

The Acchultani cull sometimes and sometimes they get culled. The first
two books are about the Acchultani and the third book is about the next
generation.
There are many other interplanetary species but the dadgum Acchultani
keep on culling them.
Lynn

Thanks. I just started last night. I look forward to the rest of the series.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by The Zygon

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

I am going for David Weber's Dahak series. A lifespan of 600 years with
significant levels of bio-enhancement based on one's position in life.
An human empire spanning thousands of light years. A
trans-materialization device capable of spanning those light years in an
instant. A society where everyone is needed to repopulate the Galaxy.
https://www.amazon.com/Mutineers-Moon-Dahak-David-Weber/dp/0671720856/
Lynn

One that is culled every few hundred thousand years by an alien species. No thank you. And it makes little sense for there to be just two intelligent species. Some physicists once said that any number between 1 and infinity makes little sense when talking about naturally occurring phenomena. That makes sense to me. Either human beings are unique or there are lots of intelligent species.

The Acchultani cull sometimes and sometimes they get culled. The first
two books are about the Acchultani and the third book is about the next
generation.
There are many other interplanetary species but the dadgum Acchultani
keep on culling them.
Lynn

Thanks. I just started last night. I look forward to the rest of the series.

I hope you enjoy them. _Mutineer's Moon_ and the _Armageddon
Inheritance_ are both six star books for me on a five star scale. The
third book, _Heirs of Empire_ is a five star for me and is a radical
change from the first two books.

I have a box of 100+ Perry Rhodan books (in English) that I bought on
Ebay for $100 that I plan to read some day. I read them all back in the
1970s but lost my originals in the great flood of 1989.

Lynn

[Jerry Brown]

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.

On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

Post by The Zygon
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

Clarke's Diaspar for me thanks, although I'd be happy in the Culture
as long as I kept well clear of any Special Circumstances.

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

Clarke's Diaspar for me thanks,

I had a similar thought. At the end of _The City and the Stars_,
it was strongly suggested that Diaspar and Lys would actively work
towards something that incorporated the best of both.

Quasi-eternal, perfectly fit life (Diaspar) plus living in a lush Eden
(Lys) and a resurgence of interstellar exploration now that they're over
their collective colly-wobbles. Sign me up.

[Jerry Brown]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:27:10 -0600, "Michael F. Stemper"

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.

Clarke's Diaspar for me thanks,

I had a similar thought. At the end of _The City and the Stars_,
it was strongly suggested that Diaspar and Lys would actively work
towards something that incorporated the best of both.
Quasi-eternal, perfectly fit life (Diaspar) plus living in a lush Eden
(Lys) and a resurgence of interstellar exploration now that they're over
their collective colly-wobbles. Sign me up.

At the end of the book Alvin is considering ending the citizens'
immortality in the name of Progress, although I'd suspect that they
would just wait for him to pass on himself, then promptly reinstate
it.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

Post by Jerry Brown
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:27:10 -0600, "Michael F. Stemper"

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I

have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep
Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think
that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the
problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Jerry Brown
Clarke's Diaspar for me thanks,

I had a similar thought. At the end of _The City and the Stars_,
it was strongly suggested that Diaspar and Lys would actively work
towards something that incorporated the best of both.
Quasi-eternal, perfectly fit life (Diaspar) plus living in a lush Eden
(Lys) and a resurgence of interstellar exploration now that they're over
their collective colly-wobbles. Sign me up.

At the end of the book Alvin is considering ending the citizens'
immortality in the name of Progress, although I'd suspect that they
would just wait for him to pass on himself, then promptly reinstate
it.

Cue Dave shout: "ALLLVIN!"

[Moriarty]

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

The Zetetic Elench, from "Excession".

-Moriarty, fresh from a re-read

[The Zygon]

Post by Moriarty

Post by Jerry Brown

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

The Zetetic Elench, from "Excession".
-Moriarty, fresh from a re-read

The Elench seem incredibly naive to me.

[Jerry Brown]

On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:10:57 -0800 (PST), Moriarty

Post by Moriarty

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

The Zetetic Elench, from "Excession".

Aha! I got the "Z" right.

Post by Moriarty
-Moriarty, fresh from a re-read

Thinking about it myself too. Especialy if this miniseries goes ahead,
so I can bore friends and colleagues who haven't read them.

[The Zygon]

Post by Jerry Brown
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:10:57 -0800 (PST), Moriarty

Post by Moriarty

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

The Zetetic Elench, from "Excession".

Aha! I got the "Z" right.

Post by Moriarty
-Moriarty, fresh from a re-read

Thinking about it myself too. Especialy if this miniseries goes ahead,
so I can bore friends and colleagues who haven't read them.
--
Jerry Brown
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

What mini-series?

[Jerry Brown]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 18:05:41 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon

Post by Jerry Brown
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:10:57 -0800 (PST), Moriarty

Post by Moriarty

Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:12:38 -0800 (PST), The Zygon

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

The Zetetic Elench, from "Excession".

Aha! I got the "Z" right.

Post by Moriarty
-Moriarty, fresh from a re-read

Thinking about it myself too. Especialy if this miniseries goes ahead,
so I can bore friends and colleagues who haven't read them.
--
Jerry Brown
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

What mini-series?

Amazon has bought the rights to Consider Phlebus:
<http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/tv/consider-phlebas/55461/amazon-to-adapt-sci-fi-novel-consider-phlebas-for-tv>

[The Zygon]

Post by Jerry Brown

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.

But there are no human beings in the Culture, although the majority of
the Culture characters we meet are of humanoid races. There was one
short story, where a citizen left the Culture (by his own choice) to
become a human and live on 1970s Earth, in the process having anything
identifying him as non-human removed (drug glands, neural lace, etc).
The other characters tried to talk him out of it, but no-one, Mind or
otherwise, prevented him.
On a larger scale, any part of the Culture that objects to the way it
is run is free to form its own offshoot (e.g. the
${IIRC_STARTS_WITH_A_Z} in one of the middle novels).

Post by The Zygon
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

Clarke's Diaspar for me thanks, although I'd be happy in the Culture
as long as I kept well clear of any Special Circumstances.
--
Jerry Brown
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

I took me a while to realize that there were no humans in the culture. And I still forget every so often. I wrote my post above during one of the times I forgot. :-)

[Moriarty]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read
about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as
epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the
best conceived human futures I have read.

Surrounded by hostiles of comparable strength (Romulans, Cardassians, Klingons) and a host of other beings and civilisations capable of chewing up humanity and spitting out the bones?

No thanks. The Star Trek universe is almost Lovecraftian in its hostility.

-Moriarty

[Quadibloc]

In order to make interesting stories, indeed, the hostiles are of
comparable strength, not vastly stronger or weaker. In that aspect,
the Star Trek future is an impossible future, so it's not one we have to worry about.

[The Zygon]

Post by Quadibloc
In order to make interesting stories, indeed, the hostiles are of
comparable strength, not vastly stronger or weaker. In that aspect,
the Star Trek future is an impossible future, so it's not one we have to worry about.

==
Are you saying that it is incredible that technologically roughly equivalent societies can co-exist? Incidentally, _The Culture_ universe is like that as well.

[Quadibloc]

Well, it's incredible that most of the ones encountered are roughly comparable. Meeting "apes or angels, but never men", to quote Clarke, is far more likely.

[The Zygon]

Post by Moriarty

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read
about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as
epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the
best conceived human futures I have read.

Surrounded by hostiles of comparable strength (Romulans, Cardassians, Klingons) and a host of other beings and civilisations capable of chewing up humanity and spitting out the bones?
No thanks. The Star Trek universe is almost Lovecraftian in its hostility.
-Moriarty

When I was much younger, I used to like stories where we were the strongest or most advanced species we know. But as I got older, such a universe smacked too much of the old foolish idea of man's special place in the universe, for me. The star trek universe in which we are just powerful enough for us to be taken seriously, but which we don't dominate seems a good compromise.

I remember how wonderful I felt when I read A E Van Vogt's _The Monster_. It was great. Then I read Barry Longyear's _Manifest Destiny_ series, and felt somewhat ashamed because I felt that it was a reasonable expectation on how we would behave, if we dominated our corner of the universe.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring omissions.
One such omission is the fact the human beings seem to have the technology for indefinite lifespans but seem not to have noticed.
I have spoken to others about this and many seem to like the _Culture_ universe of Iain Banks. I am ambivalent about that universe, since in my opinion, biological Culture citizens are really pets of the Minds. I don't like futures in which human beings are not in control of their own lives, no matter how benevolent those who are in control may be. In Star Trek the concept of progress is alive and the human beings live purposeful lives.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

How about the near future ? I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.
https://www.amazon.com/Rainbows-End-Novel-Foot-Future/dp/0812536363/

Self driving cars, digitization of libraries, and Alzheimer drugs that
remind me of Algernon and Charlie.

Lynn

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I
have read about in science fiction.  In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and
_Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I
think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for
the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

How about the near future ?  I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

digitization of libraries,

If I recall correctly, that was done by sending the books through
shredding machines, scanning the fragments as they flew past, and
sorting it all out in post.

It also had (again IIRC) a geezer like me in what was sort of a remedial
high school, where he was learning to take advantage of ubiquitous
connectivity. (Since I'm back in school, hanging with a bunch of people
in their early twenties, maybe I should give this a reread.)

[D B Davis]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I
have read about in science fiction. In my view, the Star Trek future,
especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_ and
_Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have read. I
think that the social structure is the best solution I have seen for
the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some glaring
omissions.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

How about the near future ? I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

digitization of libraries,

If I recall correctly, that was done by sending the books through
shredding machines, scanning the fragments as they flew past, and
sorting it all out in post.
It also had (again IIRC) a geezer like me in what was sort of a remedial
high school, where he was learning to take advantage of ubiquitous
connectivity. (Since I'm back in school, hanging with a bunch of people
in their early twenties, maybe I should give this a reread.)

It is said that some wealthy geezers hang out with young people to make
themselves young. OK. Truth-be-known only one snarky wag suggested that
a certain famous plutocrat (who's name eludes me at present) hoped that
youth would rub off on him.
One of the young ladies in a client's pathology lab just entered
Cornell. The lab's pathologist tried to convince this young lady to go
to med school, but she just wants to become a practitioner.
Your enrollment and her enrollment cause a brief slight twinge of
envy within me. But then the real world comes back into focus along with
my own successful small business. In the end, my own contribution to the
greatest good is to just keep-on-keeping-on with my business.
Now it's time for me to peek at your website. Part of my plan for
this weekend's to finalize the sf area of my own website, and your
website left a good impression.

Thank you,

--
Don

[David Goldfarb]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Lynn McGuire
I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

Mine does, quite prominently -- I just pulled it off the shelf to check.
It is a first edition, so not something that was added later.

The phrase appears underneath the title text on the front cover, and
on the front dust jacket flap. It doesn't appear inside the book itself.
Is it possible that you've gotten rid of the dust jacket, and that's
why you don't see it?

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by David Goldfarb

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Lynn McGuire
I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

Mine does, quite prominently -- I just pulled it off the shelf to check.
It is a first edition, so not something that was added later.
The phrase appears underneath the title text on the front cover, and
on the front dust jacket flap. It doesn't appear inside the book itself.
Is it possible that you've gotten rid of the dust jacket, and that's
why you don't see it?

I bought it used and never had the dust jacket.

Thanks for checking.

Doesn't ISFDB usually include subtitles? I did a quick check on RAH, and
it shows subtitles for both _Job_ and _For Us, the Living_. Should I (or
somebody) add this to the ISFDB entry, or is it not there for a reason?

[Ahasuerus]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by David Goldfarb

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Lynn McGuire
I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

Mine does, quite prominently -- I just pulled it off the shelf to check.
It is a first edition, so not something that was added later.
The phrase appears underneath the title text on the front cover, and
on the front dust jacket flap. It doesn't appear inside the book itself.
Is it possible that you've gotten rid of the dust jacket, and that's
why you don't see it?

I bought it used and never had the dust jacket.
Thanks for checking.
Doesn't ISFDB usually include subtitles? I did a quick check on RAH,
and it shows subtitles for both _Job_ and _For Us, the Living_. Should
I (or somebody) add this to the ISFDB entry, or is it not there for a
reason?

Generic subtitles like "A Novel" are usually omitted while specific
subtitles like "A Novel with One Foot in the Future" are usually
included. However, we use title pages as our primary source of title
data, not covers or dust jackets. The main reason is that publishers
put all kinds of things on covers. It can be difficult to tell where
the title ends and the promotional material ("Now a major motion
picture", "A novel of suspense", etc) begins.

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Ahasuerus

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by David Goldfarb

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Lynn McGuire
I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

Mine does, quite prominently -- I just pulled it off the shelf to check.
It is a first edition, so not something that was added later.
The phrase appears underneath the title text on the front cover, and
on the front dust jacket flap. It doesn't appear inside the book itself.
Is it possible that you've gotten rid of the dust jacket, and that's
why you don't see it?

I bought it used and never had the dust jacket.
Thanks for checking.
Doesn't ISFDB usually include subtitles? I did a quick check on RAH,
and it shows subtitles for both _Job_ and _For Us, the Living_. Should
I (or somebody) add this to the ISFDB entry, or is it not there for a
reason?

Generic subtitles like "A Novel" are usually omitted while specific
subtitles like "A Novel with One Foot in the Future" are usually
included. However, we use title pages as our primary source of title
data, not covers or dust jackets. The main reason is that publishers
put all kinds of things on covers. It can be difficult to tell where
the title ends and the promotional material ("Now a major motion
picture", "A novel of suspense", etc) begins.

It did sound to me like a puff statement from a favourable review.

Or it could be that /and/ a subtitle... maybe.

Suppose the reviewer writes, "I would not call this a novel wih
on foot in the future", and the editor goes "But I will."
Or the editor underlines that in the review and says "Put that on
the cover", though it's the opposite of what he reviewer said.
So you follow the instruction literally.

Now, titles in ISFDB containing the word "rouge"... for a work
in English... okay, none for the work itself, but you've listed
one review of L. Sprague De Camp's _Rouge Queen_, and an artist's
credit fof A. E. Van Vogt's _Rouge Ship_. And a few la-di-da
work titles in French where presumably you accurately identify
a work as (mostly) in English, and a slightly improbable number
of references to _Castle Rouge_, which is a fine work, I'm sure.

And if the work actually claims to review _Rouge Queen_, then
it serves them right.

[Ahasuerus]

On Sunday, March 11, 2018 at 11:53:43 AM UTC-4, Robert Carnegie wrote:
[snip-snip]

Post by Robert Carnegie
Now, titles in ISFDB containing the word "rouge"... for a work
in English... okay, none for the work itself, but you've listed
one review of L. Sprague De Camp's _Rouge Queen_,

The review appears in Darrell Bain's _My 100 Most Readable (and
Re-Readable) Science Fiction Novels_. The publication note mentions
that "There are numerous misspellings of author names and titles."

Post by Robert Carnegie
and an artist's credit fof A. E. Van Vogt's _Rouge Ship_.

I'll ask the verifier to double-check his copy of _Virgil Finlay:
The Art of Things to Come: Illustrations for the Science Fiction
Book Club_. Thanks.

Post by Robert Carnegie
And a few la-di-da work titles in French where presumably you
accurately identify a work as (mostly) in English, and a
slightly improbable number of references to _Castle Rouge_,
which is a fine work, I'm sure.

There are 8 matching titles, all of them in the same book,
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?254001 . Worse things have been
known to happen, e.g.
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=Captain+Future+and+the+Seven+Space+Stones&type=All+Titles

[Ahasuerus]

Post by Ahasuerus
[snip-snip]

Post by Robert Carnegie
Now, titles in ISFDB containing the word "rouge"... for a work
in English... okay, none for the work itself, but you've listed
one review of L. Sprague De Camp's _Rouge Queen_,

The review appears in Darrell Bain's _My 100 Most Readable (and
Re-Readable) Science Fiction Novels_. The publication note mentions
that "There are numerous misspellings of author names and titles."

Post by Robert Carnegie
and an artist's credit fof A. E. Van Vogt's _Rouge Ship_.

The Art of Things to Come: Illustrations for the Science Fiction
Book Club_. Thanks. [snip]

Fixed. Thanks for reporting the issue!

[Chris Buckley]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by David Goldfarb

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Lynn McGuire
I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

Mine does, quite prominently -- I just pulled it off the shelf to check.
It is a first edition, so not something that was added later.
The phrase appears underneath the title text on the front cover, and
on the front dust jacket flap. It doesn't appear inside the book itself.
Is it possible that you've gotten rid of the dust jacket, and that's
why you don't see it?

I bought it used and never had the dust jacket.
Thanks for checking.
Doesn't ISFDB usually include subtitles? I did a quick check on RAH, and
it shows subtitles for both _Job_ and _For Us, the Living_. Should I (or
somebody) add this to the ISFDB entry, or is it not there for a reason?

The Library of Congress entry for _Rainbows End_ does not include the
subtitle. The entry for _Job_ does. So I would say that it's not official,
for whatever reason.

My first edition, first printing hardcover agrees with David's observations:
the subtitle is on the dust jacket twice, but not anywhere in the book.

Chris

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by The Zygon
All,
I have thought a great deal about the best possible human future I
have read about in science fiction.  In my view, the Star Trek
future, especially as epitomized in _The Next Generation_, _Voyagers_
and _Deep Space 9_ to be the best conceived human futures I have
read. I think that the social structure is the best solution I have
seen for the problem presented by the end of scarcity, despite some
glaring omissions.
I would like to hear the opinions of others.

How about the near future ?  I would like to submit _Rainbows End: A
Novel with One Foot in the Future_ by Vernor Vinge.

Interesting. My Tor hardback doesn't have that subtitle. I can't readily
tell from the ISFDB when it was added.

...

I have noted that Amazon tends to add descriptive items to their item
titles. I just copied it out of the Amazon entry. BTW, _Rainbow's End_
was the 2007 Hugo novel winner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbows_End

Lynn