[HN Gopher] It Awaits Your Experiments
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       It Awaits Your Experiments
        
       Author : pavel_lishin
       Score  : 110 points
       Date   : 2025-05-13 15:27 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.rifters.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.rifters.com)
        
       | jkingsman wrote:
       | It took me a moment to realize, even after the mention of
       | Echopraxia, that this was Peter Watts.
       | 
       | If you enjoy hard to very-hard science fiction, I strongly
       | recommend the first book of his series, Blindsight. I thoroughly
       | loved the read and bounced right back to the beginning for a
       | second read with the context I'd gained on the first one. It's an
       | absolute firehose of concepts; reminded me a bit of Accelerando
       | by Charles Stross but a little less pleased with its own
       | geekiness. The best summary I could give would be a meditation on
       | consciousness set against a first-contact backdrop.
        
         | subscribed wrote:
         | I think the Blindsight is the best sci-fi book for me.
         | Absolutely gripping and novel.
         | 
         | And what I found particularly interesting, the afterword is
         | about as interesting and engaging as the book.
         | 
         | It's such a gem of a book.
        
         | otikik wrote:
         | I wonder how he's feeling about Chinese rooms these days.
        
           | ImaCake wrote:
           | He blogs a lot on the OP link. I would imagine he has a few
           | words about LLMs in there.
           | 
           | One of his older works explores the risks of software similar
           | to LLMs but a little more advanced.
        
         | Boogie_Man wrote:
         | This may be well known, but I'm posting it because I didn't
         | know: "very-hard" science fiction in this context means
         | extremely plausible science fiction, as opposed to extremely
         | speculative science fiction. The author explains how these
         | fantastic things exist in a way which is realistic.
         | 
         | Originally, I thought it meant "very hard to understand" i.e.
         | very technically complicated
        
           | ZpJuUuNaQ5 wrote:
           | >extremely plausible science fiction
           | 
           | >I thought it meant "very hard to understand"
           | 
           | For a mere mortal like myself, those definitions aren't
           | mutually exclusive. I think I tried reading "Blindsight" a
           | long time ago but never got past a few dozen pages. Maybe I
           | should give it a try again someday.
        
             | Scene_Cast2 wrote:
             | Blindsight is known to be a slog for a lot of people
             | including myself.
             | 
             | I love sci-fi, I love challenging ideas, and I really liked
             | the concepts explored in Blindsight - except that I learned
             | those concepts through summaries and selective reading.
        
               | jkingsman wrote:
               | Yes, there were definitely parts where I felt maybe I was
               | picking up on a vibe or a hint, and later realized that
               | was now a structural part of the story without which I
               | would be quite lost.
               | 
               | I found this INCREDIBLY FULL OF SPOILERS explanation of
               | fundamental plot points to be helpful in confirming or
               | summarizing some things I missed[0].
               | 
               | [0]: ---EXTREME SPOILER WARNING-- https://old.reddit.com/
               | r/printSF/comments/4p6zqj/understandi...
        
             | Boogie_Man wrote:
             | I'm certified dumb as a box of rocks 19 Wonderlic and I was
             | able to follow most of it without issue or pause. It's
             | possible that it's a bell curve and I'm too dumb to realize
             | I was missing things. Hard to say.
        
           | jkingsman wrote:
           | Plausible oftentimes, I would say, but more that there are
           | reliable, consistent systems at work that may or may not be
           | explained, but that are definitely used. Very little "magic"
           | or hand waving, but at the least the implication that there
           | is an understandable system at work at some level.
        
             | mordechai9000 wrote:
             | To me, "hard science fiction" evokes the old school writers
             | like Arthur C. Clarke who would explore ideas with a slide
             | rule or a calculator when planning a story. Even if he had
             | to use a little hand waving and some unobtainium to make
             | Ringworld work.
        
               | crooked-v wrote:
               | Maybe the neatest part of that with Ringworld is when
               | fans proved that the theoretical structure itself is
               | orbitally unstable... which he then came up with
               | explanations for and used as a major plot point in a
               | follow-up book.
        
               | Loughla wrote:
               | Larry Niven wrote ringworld and the follow ups, not
               | Clarke. Clarke wrote the Rama series.
        
           | Scarblac wrote:
           | The way I see it is that hard science is _about_ the new
           | science and its effects on people, so it has to make the
           | science believable somehow.
           | 
           | Whereas soft science fiction has a futuristic setting but
           | isn't primarily about that.
        
           | ngangaga wrote:
           | I would characterize "hard" sci fi as "consistent" or
           | "coherent", not necessarily "plausible".
        
           | swayvil wrote:
           | How about very comprehensible science fiction?
           | 
           | Because science first and foremost strives for
           | comprehensibility in its discussion of strange things.
           | 
           | Which is exactly why we borrow it for fiction.
        
         | NikolaNovak wrote:
         | Astonishing book which I reread regularly. Echopraxia has grown
         | on me upon further reading - initially I focused on the seeming
         | promise of action and plot, vs ideas and concepts.
         | 
         | His Starfish book however has the most realistic, plausible,
         | feasible, likely AI doomsday scenario though - published as it
         | was 26 years ago and without AI being the focus for majority of
         | the book.
        
           | duskwuff wrote:
           | "Checkers or chess?"
           | 
           | But yes. Especially when you boil it down to the essentials:
           | humans take an AI built to perform one task and press it into
           | duty for another, much more impactful task which it was
           | completely unsuited for.
        
           | atombender wrote:
           | The Freeze-Frame Revolution is also fantastic, along with the
           | short stories, which collectively form the "Sunflower" cycle.
           | 
           | Watts writes the smartest but also scariest science fiction.
           | There's an aura of existential, Lovecraftean dread in all his
           | writings that I find incredibly appealing. In the case of
           | Sunflower, Watts is able to make the idea of floating through
           | space for millions of years, unable to stop, into something
           | genuinely upsetting. It's bleak, but also really well
           | plotted.
           | 
           | Not too long ago, Watts published a short story set right
           | after Blindsight, "The Colonel". It's an excellent,
           | standalone read.
        
       | davidthewatson wrote:
       | For those of you who read with glee of the author's work and it's
       | launch in Toronto soon, the event is free and open to the public
       | if you wanna flee to Toronto for fun or are already there. I hope
       | this won't become an unlikely Superbloom given the subject.
       | 
       | https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/coach-house-spring-group-launch-...
        
       | Atreiden wrote:
       | This is one of the coolest things I've read here in some time.
       | This is the kind of insanity I can get behind.
       | 
       | > The rest of us might think we achieve artistic immortality if
       | our work lasts a century or three. Bok blows his nose at such
       | puny ambitions. His work might get deciphered by Fermi aliens who
       | finally make it to our neighborhood a billion years from now. It
       | could be iterating right up until the sun swallows this planet
       | whole.
       | 
       | I got frisson reading this. I may have to read the author's
       | novels, his writing style is compelling.
        
         | The5thElephant wrote:
         | Peter Watts is fantastic. Very different tone from a lot of
         | other scifi, with some very clever and dark ideas.
        
         | subscribed wrote:
         | You can download several of his novels from his own website.
         | 
         | Yeah, for free.
         | 
         | And indeed, his style is like this. It's really hard to put the
         | book down.
        
       | sriram_malhar wrote:
       | This (Xenotext v2) blew my mind. I'm astonished not just by how
       | people can think like this, but the persistence of effort to get
       | it to fruition.
       | 
       | I have to read it a couple more times to savor this. What a
       | delight!
        
       | MinimalAction wrote:
       | Amazing article! His writing style is unique and made me go down
       | a rabbit hole of discovering his other works.
       | 
       | I was unaware of this demagogue of a bacterium _Deinococcus
       | radiodurans_. It survives levels of radiation that is designed to
       | kill _all_ lifeforms. Wikipedia [0] lists this as a bacteria that
       | supports panspermia -- that life originated elsewhere but spread
       | through cosmic dust and was seeded on Earth eventually.
       | 
       | Fun fact: _Thermococcus gammatolerans_ is known to be the one
       | that tolerates the most toxic radiation.
       | 
       | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodurans
        
       | alnwlsn wrote:
       | > only known organism to have ever lived on the Moon
       | 
       | Anyone know what this is referring to? The only instance I know
       | of was the Surveyor 3 camera, which was supposedly _Streptococcus
       | mitis_ and even that situation is greatly contested.
        
         | dekhn wrote:
         | their description of deinococcus has several errors. For
         | example, they claim it reproduces without DNA, which is not
         | true.
        
       | dejobaan wrote:
       | Fantastic. While it's not quite at the level of Bok's work, an
       | inevitable comparison is all of Tom7's projects (and in
       | particular http://tom7.org/harder). I always love when this kind
       | of stuff pops up onto HN. I feel that we're all interesting and
       | experimental, and sometimes need a nudge to remember that people
       | can do weird, neat stuff.
        
       | flysand7 wrote:
       | This reminds me of "I'm Humanity" by Yakushimaru Etsuko, which
       | was also etched onto a DNA of a bacteria. I love that song.
       | 
       | Also see https://ars.electronica.art/aeblog/en/2018/05/30/im-
       | humanity...
        
       | dekhn wrote:
       | I have a phd in a related field and I can't understand exactly
       | what is being said here. From what I can tell, the author claims
       | a protein was engineered, where the protein sequence maps
       | (through a chosen translation table) to a human text. But at the
       | same time, the protein folds into a well-defined shape
       | (predicted, then experimentally determined), and somehow also
       | enciphers... another poem?
        
         | duskwuff wrote:
         | You've got the right idea. The "poem" ("any style of life / is
         | prim...") is encoded as a DNA sequence. This DNA codes for a
         | protein, whose amino acids can be read as English text as well
         | ("the faery is rosy / of glow..."), and which causes the
         | bacterium to glow red. Watts mentions this work in his book
         | _Echopraxia_ as follows:
         | 
         | "The sequence spells a message _and_ codes for a protein. The
         | protein fluoresces _and_ contains a response. It's not
         | contamination or lateral transfer. It's a _poem_. "
         | 
         | There's a more verbose explanation in this interview of Bok:
         | 
         | https://maisonneuve.org/article/2011/06/1/sls-interviews-chr...
        
       | aaroninsf wrote:
       | De rigeur trigger warning,
       | 
       | Peter Watts' _Rifters_ books (hence the domain),
       | 
       | are however full of memorable compelling ideas,
       | 
       | totally un-recommendable,
       | 
       | because they are also unedited indulgences by the author in his
       | own sadomasochistic fantasies of sexual violence (specifically,
       | to women), and they are in effect sexual torture-porn.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | Meh. Art guided by science is like flight guided by digging.
       | 
       | Otoh science guided by art happens all the time.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-13 23:00 UTC)