| 
Posted Oct 26, 2002 by R. Daneel Olivaw -- (User 201118) (Member FFFF, ARS, and DOS) ( -O- )
For that matter (I realize I'm getting away from physics here.), the solution to Little Lost Robot is illogical. They decide that since they must destroy the First-Law adjusted Nestors, they have to keep all robots away when working with gamma radiation. They should have learned a lesson from Nestor-12 (I think that was his number). Point out to the robots that that they won't be able to save a human by destroying themselves, but, if they destroy themselves they might not be able to save a human in the future. After all, that argument worked on the non-adjusted nestors that Nestor 12 was stored with.
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Oct 27, 2002 by Casanova the Short
Perhaps they thought that the ambiguity inherent in the way the robots interpret the Laws would be a problem here: a robot might not think to rescue a human in a case where it *would* be destroyed but the human *would* be saved, on the basis that there might be more humans in the future that it *could* save had it not sacrificed itself on that one.
Clutching at straws, but I feel we ought to pay Isaac at least a little respect 
CtS
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 28, 2002 by R. Daneel Olivaw -- (User 201118) (Member FFFF, ARS, and DOS) ( -O- )
I agree. I overanalyzed that story. Actually, it is one of my favorites from I Robot. I think he may have been trying to suggest that the whole idea of suggesting to a robot that ever not saving a human was acceptable might be dangerous. Susan Calvin wouldn't have accepted such a solution as I suggested. Anyway, whoi am I to criticize a literary genius?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 28, 2002 by Casanova the Short
You're the person who said literary genius hopes will buy the books. I'd be more surprised if writers didn't want to hear from book-buyers
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 29, 2002 by R. Daneel Olivaw -- (User 201118) (Member FFFF, ARS, and DOS) ( -O- )
Huh? Your first sentence makes no sence to me and the second one makes little.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 30, 2002 by Casanova the Short
OK, so you asked "Who am i to criticise a literary genius?" Answer: The person who buys books. Therefore you get to choose what books you buy, and the authors *really* ought to listen to you. It's kindof a supply-and-demand version of English literature.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 3, 2002 by R. Daneel Olivaw -- (User 201118) (Member FFFF, ARS, and DOS) ( -O- )
I reallize this is a bit pedantic, but that logic makes slightly less sence when the literary genius in question has been dead for a decade. But I see your point that readers have a right to criticise writers if they don;t like their books.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 4, 2002 by Casanova the Short
I can see why the point might be considered moot, given the circumstances
On the other hand, in the case of some books/films, it's the nitpicking that provides all the fun. Especially with authors/creators, e.g. Asimov, Herbert, Tolkien, Roddenberry, Lucas, who painstakingly try to create a consistent "universe" in which to set their works. Finding the little inconsistencies and trying to excuse the Creators becomes the whole point of reading the work.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 5, 2002 by R. Daneel Olivaw -- (User 201118) (Member FFFF, ARS, and DOS) ( -O- )
I agree, although asimov actually did say he had given up on being completely consistant, it still fun to look for inconsistancies.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 14, 2007 by raindalesman
Bicentennial Man was a short story, the title of an anthology and yes the film with Robin Williams.
It was also expanded into a full size novel by Robert Silverberg. I believe that may have had the title of Millennium Man. The same happened with An Ugly Child.
Some of these things have different names in America and England.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 19, 2007 by raindalesman
I sorry, I think my last post landed in the wrong discusion. I was relying to someone who had mentioned the Robin Williams film.
Consistancy: In the introduction a book Asimov edited, he said (I hope I've got this right!) 'Perfection is the hobgoblin of the small minded'.
He this introuduction he was saying that at some point you have go give up on trying to get your writing 'correct', and just move on.
Unfortunatley I can't remember which book it was to check the quote. I don't always buy books, just read them.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Sep 12, 2007 by coolkiller1000
Amasing 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Sep 26, 2007 by darklord21
i no amazeing vary amazeing
|
| | |
| |
Posted Sep 28, 2007 by darklord21
hlalo anyone here
|
| | |
| |
Posted Sep 28, 2007 by Crescent, ACE
Hello Until later...
BCNU - Crescent
|
| | |
| |
Posted Sep 28, 2007 by coolkiller1000
well im here
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
