[HN Gopher] We're pausing Asimov Press
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       We're pausing Asimov Press
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 88 points
       Date   : 2026-03-30 09:18 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.asimov.press)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.asimov.press)
        
       | vrganj wrote:
       | It feels like a quick intro on what Asimov Press was in the first
       | place would've been a good idea.
        
         | dewey wrote:
         | It's there, just a few paragraphs in and also on
         | https://www.asimov.press/about, it's not that hard to find if
         | you are really curious.
        
           | simoncion wrote:
           | Yeah.
           | 
           | I get the impression that if you're uninterested in _either_
           | reading enough of the press release to get to the parts where
           | they mention what they did, _or_ navigating to the top-level
           | index for the blog, where what they write about is made
           | _very_ plain, then you 're not the type of person who would
           | give any shits about what they write about.
        
             | Angostura wrote:
             | No, it was just a poorly structured announcement
        
               | simoncion wrote:
               | That's, like, your opinion, man.
        
               | Macha wrote:
               | It's an announcement published for their followers and
               | distributed through their own channels to those people.
               | That it doesn't make sense when detached from that
               | context and put on HN to people with no knowledge of who
               | they are seems very much irrelevant to the goals of
               | writing the post?
        
         | jon-wood wrote:
         | If you don't know what Asimov Press is then you're probably not
         | the target audience for a post about Asimov Press not
         | publishing for a while.
        
           | bcjdjsndon wrote:
           | This is an employee posting it to hackernews, which lets be
           | honest is glad for any content that isn't a repost from 15+
           | years ago. Most people won't have heard of this vanity
           | publication. And if this is news then il go elsewhere
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | Its posts were fairly frequently shared & discussed here, I
             | immediately recognised the name, even though I'm not even
             | sure I ever read one.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=asimov.press
        
             | IAmBroom wrote:
             | Oh no!
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Joe is a great submitter and I don't believe he's an
             | employee of Asimov Press... unless he got bored with being
             | a retired anesthesiologist?
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Although I appreciate that your comment reminded me of a
           | classic Elvis Costello line
           | (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptnXM6rsxSY#t=21s), please
           | don't post like this to Hacker News.
           | 
           | It comes across as a putdown. Much better and just was easy
           | is to share some of what you know with others (https://hn.alg
           | olia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).
        
       | ipsum2 wrote:
       | I just started reading Asimov press. It has a weird name, I
       | thought they were a sci-fi publishing company at first.
       | 
       | It had a unique blend of popular science writing that was sorely
       | missing from the internet. Alas I hardly knew thee.
        
         | vidarh wrote:
         | Isaac Asimov vote a huge amount of popular science book as
         | well. They just have a shorter shelf life.
        
           | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
           | I enjoyed his "science for the layman" books, a lot more than
           | his sci-fi stuff.
           | 
           | He was _really good_ at explaining very complex stuff, in a
           | simple, approachable manner.
        
             | arethuza wrote:
             | My mother bought me "The Planet that Wasn't" when I was a
             | kid - excellent book that I re-read many times:
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Planet_That_Wasn%27t
        
               | bookofjoe wrote:
               | This is why I read HN's comments.
               | 
               | I get MANY recommendations for books/movies/shows/topics
               | I knew nothing about etc. here.
               | 
               | Just ordered this book for my 10-year-old grandson.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | Maybe I should have mentioned that was about 50 years ago
               | - still a good book though!
        
               | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
               | I suspect much of it is still relevant.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | Well I'm pretty sure that Vulcan still isn't there!
        
         | nottorp wrote:
         | The question is, has this had anything to do with Asimov the
         | writer? Was he involved at the start or endorsed it somehow?
         | 
         | Judging by the .press domain it's too new for that.
        
           | IAmBroom wrote:
           | Judging by the fact that you DNRTFA, we can't help you.
        
             | nottorp wrote:
             | Actually I did look them up and _that_ Asimov was never
             | involved with them or their parent company.
             | 
             | A bit dishonest don't you think?
        
       | siruwastaken wrote:
       | Truly sad to see this go so soon.
        
       | adamgordonbell wrote:
       | FYI: this is not Asimov's Science Fiction, the pulp sci fi
       | magazine, found along with Analog Science Fiction and Fact at
       | convenience stores near me, but something else.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimov%27s_Science_Fiction
        
         | shawn_w wrote:
         | Asimov's and Analog are struggling too
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | I doubt anyone here cared and was reading for free for years.
       | This "pausing" post got them the highest hearts and comments on
       | their substack.
       | 
       | The problem is, they are not charging when they should.
        
       | bondarchuk wrote:
       | https://www.asimov.press/about
       | 
       | > _We are an editorially-independent part of
       | [Asimov](https://www.asimov.com/)._
       | 
       | It seems to be a vanity publication for some kind of genetic
       | engineering company.
        
       | ilamont wrote:
       | _Asimov has supported us for the last two years, and we've
       | received generous grants from Astera Institute and Stripe_
       | 
       | It's not a business capable of operating without grants or
       | support from its tech parent.
       | 
       | With eight people on the masthead, the outlays are significant
       | for a publishing venture.
        
         | expedition32 wrote:
         | I read many history books that are funded by grants and
         | governments.
         | 
         | There will never be a world in which someone can sell enough
         | books to fund 5 years of research on 1950s US-China diplomatic
         | relations.
        
       | b800h wrote:
       | Ah, I found this particularly offensive when I heard about the
       | naming of the parent company. Randomly nicking a famous person's
       | name for your company is pretty rubbish behaviour IMO. The
       | odiousness decreases as a function of time since a person's
       | death.
        
         | bcjdjsndon wrote:
         | It's very easy to upset a human. Is it learned behaviour? Would
         | a kid ever take "offense" to something like this... probably
         | not, we must have learnt this at some point
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | Young children can absolutely be jealous - I can easily
           | imagine (perhaps it's even a distant memory of having
           | witnessed) a toddler being upset that someone else actually
           | _has_ the same name, nevermind co-opting it.
        
           | kjksf wrote:
           | Misleading people is not ok.
           | 
           | It's so not ok that we have laws against misleading people.
           | Not against this particular misleading (I don't think,
           | although if Asimov had a formal estate they could probably
           | sue).
           | 
           | I can't open "Tom Cruse's Fine Wine" because I'm not Tom
           | Cruse. It's wrong morally but also illegal. We have laws
           | against things like that and Tom Cruse would surely sue my
           | ass, successfully. The proof of that is that there is no "Tom
           | Cruse's **" businesses out there.
           | 
           | It might stop being illegal if the person dies because to sue
           | you have to have standing. Unless there is formal trust like
           | e.g. Tolkien's works and business affairs which probably have
           | standing to sue "Tolkien's Fine Wine".
           | 
           | A child would also take offense on being mislead. Not this
           | particular misleading because it only misleads people who
           | know who Asimov is and like his books. Your hypothetical
           | child doesn't.
           | 
           | But tell a child you'll buy him an ice cream if he finishes
           | his chores and let's see how he reacts if you mislead him by
           | not buying an ice cream.
           | 
           | You must have learnt this at some point.
        
           | palmotea wrote:
           | > It's very easy to upset a human. Is it learned behaviour?
           | Would a kid ever take "offense" to something like this...
           | probably not, we must have learnt this at some point
           | 
           | Are you human? You're talking like you're an alien from
           | another planet. Unfamiliar with humanity and it's customs.
           | 
           | Here are some facts that may interest you:
           | 
           | 1. Humans do not hatch from eggs, they grow from spores
           | underground and emerge as children.
           | 
           | 2. There is little need for learning in human society, as
           | children inherit most knowledge they need as genetic memories
           | from their parents.
           | 
           | 3. Humans never discovered fire, usually they developed the
           | technology for electric heating elements first. Only later
           | did they work out how to use fire technology.
        
         | derwiki wrote:
         | Tesla has entered the chat
        
           | chromacity wrote:
           | And speaking of product names, I hope no one here is using
           | Claude.
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | Would be neat if more continued the tradition in FOSS that
             | creators of projects names the projects after themselves,
             | like Debian or Git.
        
               | budman1 wrote:
               | I get the reference to deb and ian (two people), but not
               | git ?
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | Linus famously named git after himself.
        
               | joseda-hg wrote:
               | For those not in the know
               | 
               | "I'm an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects
               | after myself. First Linux, now git." - Linus Torvalds
               | 
               | Git
               | 
               | noun - derogatory
               | 
               | An unpleasant or contemptible person (typically used of a
               | man).
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | In fact, we need to provide more intellectual property rights
         | for people over their names. Famous people's names should be
         | blocked off in perpetuity for their families only, though
         | resale may be permitted. It is time we formalized this
         | universally held social behaviour.
        
           | TheCoelacanth wrote:
           | Perpetuity is insane. You shouldn't be able to name something
           | "Ramses" without permission even though he's been dead for
           | over 3000 years?
           | 
           | I could see maybe 20 years after death being reasonable.
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | > I could see maybe 20 years after death being reasonable.
             | 
             | And another person sees 10 years as reasonable, another as
             | 30 years. Ultimately, our life-spans also change, so what
             | works out today, might not work out in 30 years.
             | 
             | What about after the last direct decedent is no longer
             | alive? Grand-children might not care that much, but it's
             | unlikely your children wouldn't care about how others use a
             | name associated with you and indirectly them.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | It's just so icky trying to use the name Ramses. How about
             | Sheepses instead? If you must insist on the gender, perhaps
             | menses?
             | 
             | We can all agree that 100 years is perhaps sufficient,
             | though if someone makes the case that it should be a 1000
             | years I wouldn't disagree. At 5000 I think it's probably
             | still fine, but even today the descendants of Grug have not
             | received a dime despite the fact that he invented the
             | wheel, so perhaps we need to go back longer.
        
           | tliltocatl wrote:
           | > more intellectual property rights
           | 
           | is the last thing we need. Granted, picking a famous name you
           | don't have any association with is an a-hole move. Not all
           | a-hole moves should be illegal.
        
         | ghjv wrote:
         | Isaac Asimov has been dead for 34 years. How long should we
         | wait to name something after someone? Not rhetorical,
         | interested in more detail about when the odiousness crosses
         | into being socially acceptable for you.
        
           | resoluteteeth wrote:
           | I think 100 years after their death would be reasonable
           | because at that point it's long enough that people won't
           | assume there's an actual connection to the person or that
           | it's endorsed/founded by them
        
           | kjksf wrote:
           | In case of Asimov, forever.
           | 
           | To flip your rhetorical trick against you: would it be ok if
           | they did it 1 year after death? If no, then I'm "interested
           | in more detail about when the odiousness crosses into being
           | socially acceptable for you".
           | 
           | To expose your rhetorical trick: you wanted him to admit that
           | it's ok after SOME time therefore it's ok after THIS time.
           | You put the burden of proof for defending THIS time (i.e. 34
           | years) as acceptable on him. Which is hard.
           | 
           | Sneaky but only if don't get exposed.
           | 
           | Because equally correct framing is: if you accept that it's
           | NOT ok after SOME time (1 year) then the burden of proof for
           | defending it's ok THIS time (i.e. 34 years) is on you.
           | 
           | So go ahead, tell us what is the exact number of years that
           | makes it ok. Defend YOUR number the way you wanted him to
           | defend his.
        
             | johnfn wrote:
             | Are you upset about Calvin and Hobbes being a reference to
             | John Calvin and Thomas Hobbes? Probably not? I think OP is
             | asking an interesting question and you are being
             | unnecessarily combative.
        
               | rob74 wrote:
               | IMHO naming _characters_ after famous people is more
               | likely to be considered an  "honest" homage than naming a
               | _company_ after them...
        
               | johnfn wrote:
               | Are you upset that Tesla is named Tesla? Probably not? A
               | lot of people are angry about Tesla and I think even then
               | I haven't ever heard of that particular complaint.
        
             | angiolillo wrote:
             | Does your forever limit apply to names besides "Asimov"?
             | 
             | There are a lot of companies and projects that have used
             | the names of real people without that person's involvement
             | or approval: Einstein, Tesla, Edison (besides the ones
             | related to his company), Darwin, Beethoven, Mozart, Newton,
             | Kepler, Galileo, Copernicus, Archimedes, Socrates...
        
         | BoredomIsFun wrote:
         | Asimov is a widespread lastname in ex-USSR, esp. Central Asia.
         | I personally know three unrelated Asimovs.
        
       | unholiness wrote:
       | I discovered them last year on Substack and they quickly became a
       | priority read. A sort of Quanta for biology, taking time to
       | explain enough for a popular audience but keeping technical rigor
       | deep into some fascinating topics.
       | 
       | Some highlights:
       | 
       | https://open.substack.com/pub/cell/p/dna-sequencing?utm_sour...
       | 
       | https://open.substack.com/pub/cell/p/phi80?utm_source=share&...
       | 
       | https://open.substack.com/pub/cell/p/antibody-design?utm_sou...
       | 
       | https://open.substack.com/pub/cell/p/viral-capsids?utm_sourc...
       | 
       | https://open.substack.com/pub/cell/p/legibility-problem?utm_...
       | 
       | ...All in the last month! At least they went out with a bang.
        
       | asimovDev wrote:
       | Maybe I am living under the rock but I never seen a .press TLD
       | before
        
         | em-bee wrote:
         | new TLDs are no longer newsworthy. there are to many of them
         | now.
        
       | mojoe wrote:
       | I see this pattern a lot -- folks start a publication, publish
       | for a handful of years, and then shutter. I did it myself with
       | Compelling Science Fiction magazine. This is why I settled on
       | releasing only one book per year, it's sustainable while working
       | full-time on other projects.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-31 23:02 UTC)