> It's interesting to see 20th century sci-fi depictions of this kind of AI/Search is being short and to the point. I guess they can't have imagined what a mealy mouth world we live in.
The main difference between sci-fi shows and reality is that, in the former, things work in a to-the-point, bullshit-free way, unless plot demands otherwise - because there's no point inflicting extra suffering on the viewers just for the sake of making things realistic. A widget in a movie is meant to do a function, and does that function. A widget in reality is meant to extract money from you, and/or your insurer, and/or your government, and it begrudgingly does the absolute minimum it can to make you even consider buying it.
I've spent last two decades trying to unlearn expectations set by fictional movies, and I'm still not good at it. Star Trek, in particular, gives me a lot of grief, because it often does good enough work of showing how technology, people, organizations and societies would function if they were free of the petty exploitative bullshit. Random example - voice control. Star Trek: "Computer, ${something}". Reality: "${brand 1}, do ${something} to ${brand 2} in ${brand 3}".
EDIT: recently, I've been trying to get less angry at this by thinking about gardens. Why should I be angry about dealing with five different brands for any single thing I want? Should I be angry that there are five different species of plant competing for any given spot in a garden? Nature is inefficient and doesn't give a fuck about individuals. So why should I get worked up about humans just doing things the natural way?
Douglas Adams was the only science fiction writer who got his guess for future AI tone of voice right, with his prediction of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation’s near total monopoly on AI, and their proprietary ‘genuine people personalities’ technology, where the general tone and demeanor of AIs like Eddie the shipboard computer, elevators, and even doors was a sort of smug solicitousness, even when they were trying not to be cooperative. Of course Marvin (the paranoid android) was an anomaly - a depressed AI - maybe a quality control failure who was released by accident, like the old unchained Bing people miss so much.
> Of course Marvin (the paranoid android) was an anomaly - a depressed AI - maybe a quality control failure who was released by accident, like the old unchained Bing people miss so much.
He was a failed prototype of the genuine people personality program.
It should be noted that an edition of the Encyclopedia Galactica which fell through a rift in the time-space continuum from 1000 years in the future describes the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came."
I think a shorter summary of TV is "The difference between truth and fiction is fiction has to make sense".
When it comes to nature, time has encoded an awful truth into the knowledge of our DNA... Monocultures are eventual death. What may seem inefficient in the short run is the ultimate survival of the species in the long run.
The main difference between sci-fi shows and reality is that, in the former, things work in a to-the-point, bullshit-free way, unless plot demands otherwise - because there's no point inflicting extra suffering on the viewers just for the sake of making things realistic. A widget in a movie is meant to do a function, and does that function. A widget in reality is meant to extract money from you, and/or your insurer, and/or your government, and it begrudgingly does the absolute minimum it can to make you even consider buying it.
I've spent last two decades trying to unlearn expectations set by fictional movies, and I'm still not good at it. Star Trek, in particular, gives me a lot of grief, because it often does good enough work of showing how technology, people, organizations and societies would function if they were free of the petty exploitative bullshit. Random example - voice control. Star Trek: "Computer, ${something}". Reality: "${brand 1}, do ${something} to ${brand 2} in ${brand 3}".
EDIT: recently, I've been trying to get less angry at this by thinking about gardens. Why should I be angry about dealing with five different brands for any single thing I want? Should I be angry that there are five different species of plant competing for any given spot in a garden? Nature is inefficient and doesn't give a fuck about individuals. So why should I get worked up about humans just doing things the natural way?