Anti-Technology Futures

[Steve]

In looking at the popularity of games set in the Warhammer 40K universe, I'm wondering if part of the setting's appeal is the weird technology nature it has. It's a far-future setting, but the advance of technology stalled out in its past and its presence seems more about rote use than understanding how things work and making further advances.

 

Dune and game settings like it have a similar feeling. Science doesn't advance and things have a static feeling.

 

Is it the schizoid feeling in the treatment of technology that is part of the appeal of such settings?

[Lord Liaden]

I've noticed a similar phenomenon in the Star Wars franchise. The Old Republic era was thousands of years before the film series, but for the games and books set in that era the technology seems virtually indistinguishable.

 

There may potentially be a few factors at work here. One is recognizability. The devices we see in these universes are basically standing in for the vehicles and weapons we're familiar with today, or analogues to historical ones such as "energy swords." They give us a familiar frame of reference, and changing them too much to reflect scientific advances makes them harder to relate to.

 

Another factor could be the sci-fi equivalent of the "golden age" we often see in mythology and fantasy. The past was the era of giants who achieved wonders, but their time is gone and their miraculous secrets lost. We lesser beings of modern times can only marvel at their accomplishments, perhaps continue to use some of them without really understanding, and otherwise scrounge through their dregs for fragments of lore.

[Old Man]

Until very recently, stagnation or very slow progress were pretty much the norm for human societies.  Feudal Japan, ancient China, the Middle Ages in Europe--centuries would pass with little or no technological development whatsoever.  There are a number of reasons for that: humans are reflexively suspicious of change, the humans in charge are actively hostile to change, and it takes a long period of political stability, economic abundance, and societal tolerance in order to sustain ongoing technological development.

 

Look at the technology that mankind has already lost, or nearly lost, and had to reinvent over the years.  The Greeks had geared mechanisms, enormous land and sea vehicles, and metal-framed structures, and that knowledge is pretty much gone.  The Chinese had Admiral Zheng's fleet of preposterously large ships and basically decided that they weren't even worth the effort to record in detail (which is weird for the Chinese, who pretty much invented bureaucracy).  We're still trying to figure out how the Vikings rigged and navigated their ships.  And so on.

 

There are any number of reasons why the inventor/engineer class of people might become so few in number as to be barely able to maintain existing technology let alone invent new things.

[DShomshak]

Well, the Middle Ages in Europe actually saw a fair bi of technological development. But the idea of "progress" as such was not nearly as strong, and new inventions and techniques appeared and spread slowly enough that it wasn't so obtrusive. Nothing like Isaac Asimov's observation that his father was born before the airplane and died after the Moon landing.

 

As LL says, some SF settings may deliberately try for a mythic, "archaic future" feel for exoticism or to make a point about the setting.

 

Though, it's also possible that technological progress does have limits and someday people will have built everything that could be built. But that doesn't account for the retrogression or appearance of archaism in some settings.

 

A more sinister possibility is that of James Blish's Day After Judgment or H. P. Lovecraft's introductory paragraphs to "Call of Cthulhu": The human mind can only stand so much truth before reason cracks and people go mad or retreat into deliberate ignorance. In which case you could get a future of high technology maintained by rote, but it's socially dangerous to inquire too deeply why things work or try to invent anything new.

 

Such a view may even be justified. In Jalk Chalker's "Well of Souls" series, it's mentioned that genetic engineering and other technologies have enabled powerful or ideologically driven people to build horrific societies. Some technologies have been banned as, literally, too dangerous to exist. Though in an ultimate crisis, the long-sealed Weapons Locker of super-weapons and suppressed discoveries is opened...

 

(Incidentally, see J. B. S. Haldane's Daedalus; or, Science and the Future for an interesting discussion of how scientific progress inevitably turns good into evil. Though also why this is a good thing overall.)

 

Dean Shomshak

[Badger]

Well, the Middle Ages in Europe actually saw a fair bi of technological development. But the idea of "progress" as such was not nearly as strong, and new inventions and techniques appeared and spread slowly enough that it wasn't so obtrusive. Nothing like Isaac Asimov's observation that his father was born before the airplane and died after the Moon landing.

 

As LL says, some SF settings may deliberately try for a mythic, "archaic future" feel for exoticism or to make a point about the setting.

 

Though, it's also possible that technological progress does have limits and someday people will have built everything that could be built. But that doesn't account for the retrogression or appearance of archaism in some settings.

 

A more sinister possibility is that of James Blish's Day After Judgment or H. P. Lovecraft's introductory paragraphs to "Call of Cthulhu": The human mind can only stand so much truth before reason cracks and people go mad or retreat into deliberate ignorance. In which case you could get a future of high technology maintained by rote, but it's socially dangerous to inquire too deeply why things work or try to invent anything new.

 

Such a view may even be justified. In Jalk Chalker's "Well of Souls" series, it's mentioned that genetic engineering and other technologies have enabled powerful or ideologically driven people to build horrific societies. Some technologies have been banned as, literally, too dangerous to exist. Though in an ultimate crisis, the long-sealed Weapons Locker of super-weapons and suppressed discoveries is opened...

 

(Incidentally, see J. B. S. Haldane's Daedalus; or, Science and the Future for an interesting discussion of how scientific progress inevitably turns good into evil. Though also why this is a good thing overall.)

 

Dean Shomshak

 

Actually both my maternal grandparents were born before the airplane, and died after the moon landing.

[Steve]

Archaic Future. I like the sound of that. It does convey a certain image that fits how some SF stories and RPGs portray settings.

[Christopher]

I've noticed a similar phenomenon in the Star Wars franchise. The Old Republic era was thousands of years before the film series, but for the games and books set in that era the technology seems virtually indistinguishable.

 

There may potentially be a few factors at work here. One is recognizability. The devices we see in these universes are basically standing in for the vehicles and weapons we're familiar with today, or analogues to historical ones such as "energy swords." They give us a familiar frame of reference, and changing them too much to reflect scientific advances makes them harder to relate to.

Star Wars is a odd case. It has been (repeatedly) called a "modern Fairytale". We have (Jedi) Knights. Royal Princesses. Dark Lords. Emperors. Evil Empires.

It has been stated as a in game reason for "no advance/decline the next 1k Years", that the Republic will enter a Dark Age (propably after deafeating the Sith Empire).

 

Another factor could be the sci-fi equivalent of the "golden age" we often see in mythology and fantasy. The past was the era of giants who achieved wonders, but their time is gone and their miraculous secrets lost. We lesser beings of modern times can only marvel at their accomplishments, perhaps continue to use some of them without really understanding, and otherwise scrounge through their dregs for fragments of lore.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Several settings (Star Wars in particular) uses Tech (inlcuding force based tech) as replacement for Magic in thier plot devices.

Some settings go as far as revealing that magic is technology or have this as a premise.

 

There is some reason to think that there is a hard cap on technology. At our currrent knowledge, there is no sufficiently energy effective way to travel faster then light, for example. This could very well be a hard cap. No mater how much you develop your tech, you cannot break the laws of physics. Those and how effective our energy sources/generators/storage are defines what is possible.

 

Our energy production ability is a important part of our development. We were unable to refine alluminium before we got Industrial Energy production.

Even if you took the entire knowledge on how to build a Fusion plant 100 Years in teh past, they would propably lack the ability to generate the energy needed to make the materials needed.

If we should manage to reset our civilisation by about 100 Years from a dissaster, there is a chance we will never get past a certain point again. We have mostly used up the Oil, Coal and Uranium that is nessesary to fuel our lifestyle/development. If a later generation would have to start the industrial revolution from scratch, there would be no material to fuel it.

 

Even energy generation has a hard cap - total conversion (100% of the mass get's feed into E=mc²) is where it will end. There is only a finite amont of energy/mass in this universe.

[Tom Carman]

If we should manage to reset our civilisation by about 100 Years from a dissaster, there is a chance we will never get past a certain point again. We have mostly used up the Oil, Coal and Uranium that is nessesary to fuel our lifestyle/development. If a later generation would have to start the industrial revolution from scratch, there would be no material to fuel it.

I recently read that the majority of America's untapped coal reserves are "inaccessible" not for technical reasons but because they are under National Parks and the like. So we may be in potentially better shape for a post-disaster renaissance than you are projecting.

[lemming]

I recently read that the majority of America's untapped coal reserves are "inaccessible" not for technical reasons but because they are under National Parks and the like. So we may be in potentially better shape for a post-disaster renaissance than you are projecting.

There's a lot of coal under there, but it's a dirty energy and there are alternatives.  (though if there was something that caused us to have to use it again, it would probably be after a majority of the population died off.)

 

Right now, that coal is just being looked at so it can be shipped off to China.  I'd rather that the regions got the money thru the increase in tourism that Bryce Canyon, etc... get.

[Steve]

It sounds like there are three origins for a frozen/schizoid technology future: an apocalypse of some kind, a lack of interest in advancement or an inability to advance further.

 

Warhammer 40K and the like seem to be universes where there was an apocalyptic event and a dark age.

 

Star Wars is more like a universe where technology hit a limit or the people lack interest in moving forward technologically.

[Christopher]

Star Wars is more like a universe where technology hit a limit or the people lack interest in moving forward technologically.

We actually had a ingame discussion about the development in the SWTOR unvierse.

One reason is actually that the Star Wars verse is a bit closer to Traveller then Star Trek. Sure there is a republic/empire, but pretty much every planet and civilisation has it's own technology tree. There is not such a thing as "technology in star wars", but such a thing as "Sith Technolgoy in Star Wars", "Corellian technology", "Bothan Tech". The empires/republic aside there is no standartisation of tech. And the empire/republic is spanning thousands of inhabited stelar systems (it's on a completely different level of the Kradesh Scale then Star Trek's Federation). It needs time to adapt superior local tech to Standart Tech and before it is Standart tech it cannot be used military (because you only have 1-2 of them. When you need 100-200k for any major impact).

[sinanju]

It sounds like there are three origins for a frozen/schizoid technology future: an apocalypse of some kind, a lack of interest in advancement or an inability to advance further.

 

Warhammer 40K and the like seem to be universes where there was an apocalyptic event and a dark age.

 

Star Wars is more like a universe where technology hit a limit or the people lack interest in moving forward technologically.

 

Speaking of Inability to Advance Further : One possibility for that scenario: a lack of resources. Specifically, in the Ringworld novels by Larry Niven, the natives of the ringworld are limited in what they can achieve by the utter lack of raw materials. They live on a ring of indestructible (by any force _they_ can generate) metal into which the landscape was sculpted by its builders, with no more than a few meters of topsoil. So: no oil, no coal, no metals to mine, no stone to quarry, etc. The only workable materials they have access to are plants (including trees for wood), and whatever they can scrounge from the remains of the ultra-tech civilization that ruled the ringworld before its collapse. It doesn't matter how smart or innovative you are if you simply don't have the materials you need.

[Christopher]

Speaking of Inability to Advance Further : One possibility for that scenario: a lack of resources. Specifically, in the Ringworld novels by Larry Niven, the natives of the ringworld are limited in what they can achieve by the utter lack of raw materials. They live on a ring of indestructible (by any force _they_ can generate) metal into which the landscape was sculpted by its builders, with no more than a few meters of topsoil. So: no oil, no coal, no metals to mine, no stone to quarry, etc. The only workable materials they have access to are plants (including trees for wood), and whatever they can scrounge from the remains of the ultra-tech civilization that ruled the ringworld before its collapse. It doesn't matter how smart or innovative you are if you simply don't have the materials you need.

A variation of this is also in the "Sword of the Stars" Unvierse, with the Origin of the Locust Grand Menace:

 

 

The Locusts are a trans–carbon race. They began their existence as sentient living things, but chose of their own free will to give up their bodies and their mortality to become self–replicating machines.

All Locusts were once members of a race of mammalian–type sentients. They were carbon–based life forms slaved to a carbon cycle of death and birth, pain and pleasure. They were no more or less inclined to abuse their environment than any other sentient creature, in this pre–Locust stage, but they decided nonetheless that they would prefer to exist outside of the endless loop of birth, growth, decay and death.

Having collectively risen to sentience, achieved a Space Age and an advanced technology base, a very tiny minority of them decided that they were simply too good to suffer the slings and arrows of the carbon cycle anymore. They built the first Locust City and downloaded their minds as engrams into Locust bodies.

With the transition to a trans–carbon lifestyle, the Locusts lost any sense of connection to the needs and wants of those still tethered to a carbon biosphere. The Locust "experience" of life is very insular. New experiences, to the extent that these are possible, have no impact on Locust identity or personality. Engrams cannot learn or change as living beings do.

Locusts are not an AI rebellion, and do not have the strengths and weaknesses of true Artificial Intelligences. Nor do they have any special hatred of carbon–based life per se. The conflicts that they have with carbon–folk are coincidental, rather than deliberately instigated. The Locusts do not hate carbon–based life, they simply sweep aside whatever and whoever is in the way. The Locusts feel entitled to take anything and everything they need from a system. The members of their own race who decided not to join them and transcend a carbon lifestyle were treated in a predictable fashion. If the remainder of the parent species is ever found, it is likely that they will be living on a stripped world, trapped in a Stone Age from which they can never escape.

Locusts replicate themselves for the same reason that they wanted to live forever: ego. After all, how can there be too much perfection? The minds of the Locusts are very involved in the process of self–replication. Narcissus could only dream of an experience like it. All known Locust spheres are duplicates of one another in every detail. When the Locusts duplicate themselves, the copy is perfect. If by chance an imperfect copy was to be made, it would be resorbed and re–cast until proper duplication could be achieved.

There is no record of Locusts attacking other Locusts. Locusts are oblivious to the fate of their copies and have no interest in military strategy per se. The only right answer is the one they already know. They are not a "Hive Mind", but rather an endlessly repeating city of trans–carbon entities. One can imagine them as a collective or commune, but they do not surrender their individuality to the whole in any way — that would smack of humility. The City Core is the residence of all the minds grown too abstract to be self–motivated personalities.

Do the Locusts "think"? Yes. The Locusts think quite deeply...about themselves...and only themselves, and what things mean... to themselves. And how much better the universe is when there are more of...themselves. Because when there are more of themselves...there is less chance of their wonderful selves ceasing to exist.

The Locust personalities are neither a hierarchy nor a bureaucracy. There is very little variation in their responses to threats or challenge. There is no "military AI" which has authority over the others. If the movement of the Sphere from system to system requires a decision between equally viable options, random chance is enough to determine their course. They are aware of one another and factor the presence of other spheres into their calculations, if they are considering a move to a new system. Communication is probably too strong a word for this subtle readjustment — people do not need to talk in order to avoid jostling one another in an elevator.

A decision was made long ago about how to handle the interface between the Sphere and the universe. The Locusts are still living according to that decision. Why would they ever change their minds, when their minds are by definition perfect?

The Sphere sustains each individual Locust and can provide them with new bodies as needed, unless it is destroyed. The tiny drones are Locust bodies, occupied by the engrams when the Sphere must be defended. The Sphere itself is the residence of all the minds grown too abstract to be self–motivated personalities. Those who are no longer interested in leaving the Sphere, even to defend the Sphere. This potential (to make all problems someone else's problem to solve) was always present in the personality of the living person, it has just become more strongly expressed in the engram.

 

 

 

Considerign that this menace is wandering, there could be quite a few worlds that were stripped of Resources (important metals at least), but still sustain intelligent life.