h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

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.

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

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?

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

Huh? Your first sentence makes no sence to me and the second one makes little.

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.

I see your point.

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.

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.

I agree, although asimov actually did say he had given up on being completely consistant, it still fun to look for inconsistancies.

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.

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.

Amasing

i no amazeing vary amazeing

hlalo anyone here

Hello Until later...
BCNU - Crescent

well im here