Quote:
Originally Posted by QuantumIguana
Each author is going to have their own take on AI, a diversity of views gives something to think about. I remember a story about robots, and some people didn't like it because these robots didn't follow Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. But they weren't Asimov-type robots, so there was no reasonable expectation that they would follow his laws. There's room for a whole lot of views.
|
It would be a sad state of affairs if any particular vision, no matter how compelling, overwhelmed alternative views. Especially in a genre that aims to explore ideas.
One of the better side-effects of the growth of the alternate-history sub-genre is that even counter-factual science has a place under the SF tent. (Witness Steampunk.)
SF is about exploring ideas; even the occssional impossibility can be tolerated. (For the right payoff.)
Reminds me of Doc Smith's Ca. 1960 tweak to SKYLARK OF SPACE to explain away Relativity and the Speed of Light limit; "...it looks like the Theory wasn't entirely right." (Or some such.)
Sometimes the story is fun enough we can wink and nod and move on.