[HN Gopher] Isaac Asimov: The Last Question (1956)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Isaac Asimov: The Last Question (1956)
        
       Author : ColinWright
       Score  : 584 points
       Date   : 2026-04-17 12:01 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (hex.ooo)
 (TXT) w3m dump (hex.ooo)
        
       | jasongill wrote:
       | This is one of those stories, just like the SR-71 "ground speed
       | check" story, that every single time I see it posted I just have
       | to read the entire thing again. I love it.
        
         | markus_zhang wrote:
         | How about this one?
         | 
         | https://www.haiku-os.org/legacy-docs/benewsletter/Issue4-8.h...
        
           | b3lvedere wrote:
           | That was an awesome read. Thanks.
        
           | ggerules wrote:
           | Yes! Thanks for posting! This gives the feel of what my
           | career looked like in the 80s and early 90s.
        
             | markus_zhang wrote:
             | Man you should share your story. I got through a few Linux
             | device driver labs but the more I read the less I
             | understand. Even the keyboard driver or the tty driver are
             | thousands of lines long.
             | 
             | I don't know how people managed to write graphics card
             | drivers back in the day. In the 80d it's going to be all
             | assembly code too, I think.
             | 
             | They are more black magic than the non-driver kernel
             | components. I can at least understand the concept of kernel
             | components such as VFS/Scheduler and read legacy kernel
             | code without too much trouble, but drivers, even those in
             | Linux 0.12 back in 1991, are crazily hard for me.
        
         | jihadjihad wrote:
         | Agreed. Don't forget the "Can't send emails farther than 500
         | miles" one, too [0]:
         | 
         | 0: https://web.mit.edu/jemorris/humor/500-miles
        
           | rationalist wrote:
           | _More Magic_ :
           | 
           | https://users.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/magic.html
        
             | nickt wrote:
             | I love this one. I thought it was old when I first read it,
             | and today I realised that was 36 years ago!
        
               | kraquepype wrote:
               | ~20 years ago for me... I remember finding it when I
               | first started working as a sysadmin. That and the story
               | of the first "bug" report. That was a fun time.
               | 
               | https://www.doncio.navy.mil/CHIPS/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=
               | 547...
        
           | rouvax wrote:
           | For more reading, see also: https://web.archive.org/web/20250
           | 719141310/https://dbrgn.ch/...
           | 
           | I'm a bit proud of having suggested the author to add the
           | 2019 entry (thanks to
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19798678).
           | 
           | Hopefully there's another repo of Internet stories somewhere
           | else?
        
           | xeonmc wrote:
           | Not quite tech or sci-fi, but for me it's
           | https://www.eternal-
           | flame.org/library/oldlibrary/georgebusin...
        
             | IAmBroom wrote:
             | Is that the origin of the Sean Connery dragon movie,
             | Dragonheart?
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | also the story of Mel
           | 
           | https://users.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/mel.html
        
         | rationalist wrote:
         | Once I discovered that the SR-71 Ground Speed Check is most
         | likely not true, it doesn't hold the same weight for me
         | anymore.
         | 
         | Way too many unlikely variables all lining up, and no other
         | accounts of the story from all of the people (pilots, air
         | traffic controller, etc) supposedly on the frequency.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | Don't tell me the "dreaded 7-engine approach" also isn't
           | true!
        
             | rationalist wrote:
             | Who knows, but there isn't a whole story with details
             | behind it to make someone think is.
             | 
             | A short anonymous joke that may or may not be true is
             | better than a long story that is almost certainly made-up
             | by someone in authority.
        
         | sebg wrote:
         | For those curious ->
         | https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/Stories/sr-71-blac...
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | You better watch out. When my evil twin feels y'all aren't
         | upvoting my posts enough he thinks "let's do a search for
         | articles that have gotten 200+ votes at least 5 times in
         | different years" [1] It's a highly effective strategy that I
         | know dang doesn't like!
         | 
         | So I'll post another article about robot grippers which you
         | _should_ upvote instead of the breathless  "AI will give us
         | more Nobel Prize winning research" posts because: (1) robots
         | that can change bedpans and pick strawberries really _will_
         | change the world, and (2) they give out a certain number of
         | Nobel Prizes a year and AI won 't change that.
         | 
         | [1] old issues of Byte magazine are a good bet: try
         | https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1986-05
        
           | gwerbin wrote:
           | As usual, labor saving is only a good idea if the wealth
           | created is distributed throughout society, not redirected to
           | a small group of people.
        
             | parineum wrote:
             | And it almost always is through cheaper products to the end
             | user.
        
               | gwerbin wrote:
               | Citation needed. Sometimes? Sure. Almost always?
               | Questionable assertion.
        
               | parineum wrote:
               | Food, clothing, electronics...
               | 
               | Over the longer term and adjusted for inflation of
               | course. Any manufactured good that isn't supply
               | constrained really.
               | 
               | Either the products have gotten cheaper (food) or the
               | product has become significantly better at a similar
               | price point (cars) and, often times, both (televisions).
        
               | prerok wrote:
               | Sorry, what?
               | 
               | Food is much more expensive, like 30% here in Europe,
               | much faster growth than inflation. And before you state
               | that food is accounted for in inflation: economists are
               | doing some dirty tricks here by finding subpar
               | replacements.
               | 
               | Cars are also much more expensive for the same quality,
               | far surpassing inflation.
               | 
               | I will concede TVs and electronic gadgets, though.
        
               | parineum wrote:
               | Chart 42[1]
               | 
               | [1]https://www.bls.gov/opub/100-years-of-u-s-consumer-
               | spending....
               | 
               | > Cars are also much more expensive for the same quality,
               | far surpassing inflation.
               | 
               | Cars are much, much more value then they used to be.
               | 
               | The Slate truck is as close to what cars used to be in
               | the seventies. No power steering, no power brakes, no
               | crumple zones, no fuel injection, etc. All those features
               | cost a lot of money yet the amount of money spent on cars
               | really hasn't gone up in accordance.
               | 
               | A 1970 Honda Civic cost 2k base. A base model today
               | appears to be around 25k. that's more than inflation but
               | it's also a luxury car, in comparison.
               | 
               | The vehicle market is less about low pricing as much as
               | it is feature sets at price points. In other words, the
               | prices stay roughly static but they pack in more
               | features.
        
               | keybored wrote:
               | Renters are ecstatic as price of commodities are
               | plummeting as house prices go up and up: "distracting
               | myself has never been this cheap", Anon. says.
               | 
               | People think they can do one-sentence quips to describe
               | how economies work.
        
               | parineum wrote:
               | Housing is supply constrained and not tied to labor costs
               | in a significant way. It largely is tied to the price of
               | land in it's location. It's not going to get noticeably
               | cheaper with cheaper labor and materials. Although, I can
               | tell you that the products that one uses in a home have
               | gotten cheaper (fixtures, flooring, etc) with a few
               | exceptions, copper wiring and pipes for instance.
               | 
               | Housing doesn't really fit into the conversation at hand
               | about cheaper labor leading to lower prices.
               | 
               | Something interesting that touches on both of these
               | topics (housing and product cost) is that, if you look at
               | how much of household income is spent on housing and food
               | combined, they stay fairly constant. As commodity goods
               | get cheaper and cheaper, more money is spent on the
               | inelastic and luxury goods.
        
               | keybored wrote:
               | > Housing doesn't really fit into the conversation at
               | hand about cheaper labor leading to lower prices.
               | 
               | A conversation that you reframed from wealth distribution
               | to the weirdly much more narrow "cheaper products for end
               | users". Even though wealth inequality has been studied
               | plenty in itself.
               | 
               | I'm not buying the mind-commodity that you're selling.
        
               | parineum wrote:
               | > A conversation that you reframed from wealth
               | distribution to the weirdly much more narrow "cheaper
               | products for end users"
               | 
               | A further up comment refers to robots picking
               | strawberries.
        
               | elictronic wrote:
               | "housing is not tied to labor costs in a significant
               | way".
               | 
               | ~30% of new construction is labor. ~50% of repair is
               | labor.
               | 
               | Have you ever dealt with home repair or building or are
               | you just regurgitating whatever the LLM told you.
        
               | parineum wrote:
               | > ~30% of new construction is labor.
               | 
               | And what percentage of a house's price is the building?
               | 
               | > ~50% of repair is labor.
               | 
               | And how much does the average home owner spend on repairs
               | a month?
               | 
               | I've been in my current house for almost 3 years. I've
               | had one significant repair that would have cost around
               | 3k. I did it myself but that was the quote. Not too bad.
               | 
               | In places where people are concerned about a housing
               | shortage, the majority of the cost is land.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | This chart tells the story pretty well: to get it down to
               | a quip "some things we want got a lot cheaper, things we
               | need got a lot more expensive"
               | 
               | https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-or-
               | century-3
               | 
               | The story of this decade is that people think the economy
               | is terrible despite the usual metrics like unemployment
               | and inflation being not too bad. One explanation is that
               | before 2008 young people could get on the housing ladder
               | but we quit building single family houses and it got
               | harder to get a mortgage -- you see cranes in the air in
               | many towns and sometimes 5-over-1s going for miles in
               | some places like the DC suburbs.
        
         | CGMthrowaway wrote:
         | People will be reading this story for ten trillion years
        
         | Toutouxc wrote:
         | For me it's "The Hunt for the Death Valley Germans", which is
         | often quite problematic.
        
           | derwiki wrote:
           | I loved reading that. Why is it problematic?
        
             | JKCalhoun wrote:
             | Probably because actual people died.
        
             | cdelsolar wrote:
             | I am guessing because it takes hours to read.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | _The Gentle Seduction_ [1], too.
         | 
         | [1] https://eyeofmidas.com/scifi/Stiegler_GentleSeduction.pdf
        
       | charv wrote:
       | All time great short story. Has shaped my world view since I
       | first read it many years ago.
        
       | Aliyekta wrote:
       | Claude Mythos
        
         | ramon156 wrote:
         | [reference] [reference]
        
       | moffers wrote:
       | My favorite short story of all time. Between this and Deep
       | Thought in HHGttG, I couldn't believe the prescience when the
       | bitter lesson was learned and LLMs and GPUs started eating the
       | world.
        
         | baq wrote:
         | It _only_ takes understanding the exponential function and
         | _some_ imagination, right? Apparently an uncommon combination
         | of traits in people ;)
        
         | shivaniShimpi_ wrote:
         | the LLM parallel does hit different on this read multivac says
         | insufficient data across ten trillion years and the whole story
         | is basically if more compute and more data eventually gets you
         | there. what's weird is the story answers yes, not on any
         | timeframe that helps the people asking tho.
         | 
         | feels uncomfortably close to the actual situation where the
         | models keep getting better and the answer keeps being "not yet,
         | ask again later" while the answer is getting ready years late
        
           | mercer wrote:
           | maybe 42 was just the end of sequence token...
        
             | IAmBroom wrote:
             | My favorite "explanation" of that answer is that 6*9=42 in
             | base 13.
             | 
             | God's numbering system is "unlucky".
        
           | waltbosz wrote:
           | I feel like the software running multivac represents
           | something vastly more advanced than today's LLM.
           | 
           | I wonder if Asimov considered multivac to be an ancestor to
           | his positronic robots, or if the two exist in different
           | universes. I don't recall the two ever appearing in the same
           | story.
        
             | Aerolfos wrote:
             | > I wonder if Asimov considered multivac to be an ancestor
             | to his positronic robots, or if the two exist in different
             | universes. I don't recall the two ever appearing in the
             | same story.
             | 
             | I can't remember if the machines in "the evitable conflict"
             | are ever called VACs, they might be. The themes in that
             | story do for sure overlap with the story "Franchise" (which
             | is explicitly multivac).
             | 
             | Anyway the multivac from last question probably isn't the
             | same as the one in franchise anyway, because the franchise
             | multivac _is_ the same one as in  "all the troubles of the
             | world", and spoilers, but that particular multivac has
             | other problems than entropy. It could be that they "fixed"
             | it, but at this point the timeline with _other_ short
             | stories doesn 't add up.
             | 
             | In any case, the VACs would be instances of positronic
             | brains the way the machines in evitable conflict are, so if
             | anything the robots are the ancestors of multivac and not
             | the other way around.
        
               | waltbosz wrote:
               | The World Co-ordinator in "the evitable conflict" was a
               | positronic robot (not known to the public), but I think
               | you're right that the machines are never identified as
               | either positronic robots or VACs. But iirc, in the Susan
               | Calvin universe (of which "the evitable conflict" is a
               | part), robots were generally illegal on Earth, the that
               | must make the machines in that story non-robots.
               | 
               | I would say the multivac in "Franchise" _is_ the same
               | Mutlivac as  "Last Question" and "all the troubles of the
               | world" (one of my favorites). There are no positronic
               | robots in "Franchise", nor the others.
        
       | sebg wrote:
       | Lots of good comments over the years ->
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?q=%09Isaac+Asimov%3A+The+Last+Questi...
        
       | bitshiftfaced wrote:
       | For a while I thought I really liked sci fi novels and short
       | stories, and maybe that's somewhat true. But I've started
       | wondering if maybe I just liked Asimov's writing in particular.
       | Other writers in the genre are more hit or miss. Can anyone
       | recommend other writers that are on his level?
        
         | boxed wrote:
         | I mean.. a genre can't be all hits, that makes no sense :P
         | 
         | If you want good sci-fi a good list can be:
         | 
         | - Ender's Game
         | 
         | - The Martian + Project Hail Mary
         | 
         | - A Fire Upon the Deep
         | 
         | - Dune
        
           | baq wrote:
           | - Hyperion
        
           | rationalist wrote:
           | The Expanse series starting with Leviathan Wakes.
           | 
           | (I second Ender's Game, The Martian, and Project Hail Mary.)
        
           | comicjk wrote:
           | A Fire Upon The Deep is a fantastic novel for programmers to
           | read, and I think the prequel A Deepness In The Sky is even
           | better. There are some amazing old-school coding jokes in
           | there, like that everyone thinks the universal time counter
           | started at the first moon landing, but programmer
           | archaeologists know it was really 15 megaseconds later.
        
           | xeonmc wrote:
           | Though Dune is highly acclaimed for its concepts, I couldn't
           | quite get into it personally.
           | 
           | They're just too dry for my tastes.
        
           | mwigdahl wrote:
           | Neal Stephenson's work is outstanding in my opinion, although
           | some find it polarizing. My favorite of his is _Anathem_,
           | followed closely by _Seveneves_.
           | 
           | Iain Banks's science fiction novels (mostly set in the
           | Culture, but he does have others) are also great.
        
             | NetMageSCW wrote:
             | How can you not mention Snow Crash?
             | 
             | And yes to the Culture.
        
         | jakeinspace wrote:
         | Stanislaw Lem, if you can handle something a little more poetic
         | and less strictly hard sci-fi.
        
         | NickDouglas wrote:
         | Try "The Illustrated Man" by Ray Bradbury, but skip the
         | terrible frame story. The actual short stories are beautiful
         | literature and canonical sci-fi.
        
           | NetMageSCW wrote:
           | As someone who loves the Big Three (Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein)
           | and have read a lot of SF, I pretty much despise Bradbury.
           | There's no science in his science fiction.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | Not much in many of Heinlein's either. Or in Star Wars.
        
               | krapp wrote:
               | Or even Star Trek to be honest. I don't know why Star
               | Wars always gets passed off as "science fantasy" when
               | it's a more grounded universe than Trek by far - space
               | wizards notwithstanding (which Trek has plenty of.)
               | 
               | Even in a lot of hard SF, a lot of the science is wonky
               | if it falls outside of the author's special interest or
               | area of expertise. Relevant to Asimov, the only reason
               | robots have "positronic" brains in his stories is that
               | positrons were a new discovery at the time and it sounded
               | cool and futuristic to him.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | As a Trekkie, fair point. I think Star Trek does fall
               | into the "speculative fiction" category, but Star Wars
               | doesn't. It's just "space opera".
        
               | krapp wrote:
               | Space opera is still a subset of speculative fiction and
               | science fiction, saying "just" dismisses its influence on
               | the genre as a whole.
               | 
               | A lot of classic science fiction is basically "x with
               | spaceships" where x is the Napoleonic Wars, or feudal
               | Europe or the Wild West or what have you, and the
               | "science" is little more than set dressing.
        
               | NetMageSCW wrote:
               | Early Heinlein e.g. Have Spacesuit - Will Travel, Farmer
               | In The Sky, The Rolling Stones or for non-juveniles, The
               | Moon is a Harsh Mistress have lots of science.
               | 
               | Later works, less so.
        
         | shivaniShimpi_ wrote:
         | ted chiang if you haven't already. story of your life,
         | exhalation, the lifecycle of software objects. same thing
         | asimov does where the sci fi premise is really just a frame for
         | a very human question. except chiang does it in like 30 pages
         | and you feel it for a week
        
         | Arainach wrote:
         | Ted Chiang is the greatest living science fiction short story
         | writer I'm aware of, and ranks highly on my all time list.
        
           | Darkphibre wrote:
           | His short story "Understand" is just... _amazing_.
           | 
           | It wasn't until I discovered I was on the spectrum that I
           | realized why it clicked so much. >.< I'm masking all the
           | time, running conversational simulations to anticipate the
           | societally-expected response to any given situation (and am
           | high on the IQ spectrum).
           | 
           | https://web.archive.org/web/20140527121332/http://www.infini.
           | ..
        
           | jperoutek wrote:
           | I second this. Exhalation for some reason really resonates
           | with me.
        
             | Froztnova wrote:
             | Exhalation is really excellent.
             | 
             | It's not really sci-fi but I also really enjoyed The
             | Merchant And The Alchemist's Gate, and the one about the
             | tower of babel, I forget the name at the moment.
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | I have only read a few stories by Ted Chiang, but I concur,
           | they were all fantastic.
        
         | npilk wrote:
         | It's not "sci fi" but you should read Borges' short stories,
         | particularly from Ficciones.
         | 
         | You may have already read his story The Library of Babel:
         | https://sites.evergreen.edu/politicalshakespeares/wp-content...
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> But I've started wondering if maybe I just liked Asimov's
         | writing in particular.
         | 
         | A less commonly mentioned Asimov book that I really enjoyed and
         | will read again is "The End of Eternity". If you've not read
         | it, the ending is IMHO amazing and unique.
         | 
         | Last Question reminds me of it because of the style.
        
           | sjg1729 wrote:
           | I was also quite fond of Palimpsest by Stross. It's a
           | retelling of EoE but a more modern treatment (and the writing
           | is quite a bit better, IMO)
        
         | robrain wrote:
         | Becky Chambers - Wayfarer series and several enjoyable short
         | stories/novellas. Low on blasters, high on sentient life in all
         | its many forms.
        
           | robrain wrote:
           | I know you can't comment on modding - but seriously, someone
           | voted me down because they don't like a literary suggestion?
           | Tough crowd.
        
         | NetMageSCW wrote:
         | Have you tried Arthur Clarke? I would say he is close to Asimov
         | in many ways, being from the same time.
         | 
         | For others who share some similarities, though with a greater
         | emphasis on character and adventure, perhaps Hal Clement, Larry
         | Niven or Robert L. Forward.
        
         | Esn024 wrote:
         | I think Brian Daley's books have a somewhat similar feel as
         | Asimov's, particularly "Requiem for a Ruler of Worlds" and its
         | sequels.
         | 
         | I also find C.J.Cherryh's books to be often quite interesting.
         | 
         | Asimov really did have a knack for clear, deceptively simple
         | writing that isn't all that common.
        
         | riffraff wrote:
         | perhaps Fredric Brown? He and Asimov were in my primary school
         | reading anthology, and I will never thank enough the people who
         | put the book together.
         | 
         | Also, I am not sure he's translated in English, but Sessanta
         | Racconti[0] by Dino Buzzati is high on my list of fantastic
         | short stories (not sci-fi, just.. I don't know).
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sessanta_racconti
        
       | eschulz wrote:
       | I love this story. When I first read it online in college many
       | years ago I was surprised, and disappointed, when I suddenly
       | realized it was a short story. It's a great one to recommend to
       | people.
        
         | jjoonathan wrote:
         | Outer Wilds, the video game, does a brilliant job expanding on
         | this theme if you're hungry for more. "There's more to explore
         | here."
         | 
         | Warning: progression is gated behind knowledge so spoilers are
         | worse than usual and The Algorithm will aggressively try to
         | spoil you if you start poking too deep into "outer wilds"
         | searches. If you like The Last Question and can fit a game in
         | your life, Outer Wilds is a solid bet.
        
       | larrykluger wrote:
       | A classic. It was dramatized by the Rochester NY, USA Museum of
       | Science as a planetarium show, and I saw it there about 1974 with
       | my father. Great times.
        
       | quentindanjou wrote:
       | I wasn't expecting to find my favorite short-story on HN today!
       | That's a pleasant surprise! This is how I started my journey in
       | reading Isaac Asimov, I really recommend it!
        
       | zabzonk wrote:
       | In a similar vein: https://calumchace.com/favourite-relevant-sf-
       | short-story/
        
       | 0xmattf wrote:
       | One of my all-time favorites. Almost every time I'm involved in a
       | conversation about books, I always mention this. It amazes me how
       | many people have never heard of it.
        
       | grimgrin wrote:
       | okay so i'll be the sole commenter of: hex.ooo is an incredible
       | domain name to me, maybe because i dig its UI, but certainly just
       | in general
       | 
       | didn't know about ooo, maybe because it's not available on
       | namecheap!
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | It's an awesome name.
         | 
         | If you go up one level, you can see this story is one entry in
         | a great library of stuff:
         | 
         | https://hex.ooo/library/
        
       | CGMthrowaway wrote:
       | >INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER
       | 
       | Boy, it sure would be nice if _real_ LLMs were capable of giving
       | an answer like that.
        
         | bargainbin wrote:
         | You're absolutely right! I do have insufficient data for a
         | meaningful answer. This is not an *insightful prediction* --
         | it's *Dunning-Kruger masquerading as qualified intelligence*
        
           | croisillon wrote:
           | No Information before. No information after. This is not a
           | failure -- it's narcissism as a service.
        
             | combobyte wrote:
             | YaaS -- yes-men as a service
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | Did a human write this?
        
             | mikemarsh wrote:
             | I would guess a real human, one with a good sense of humor
             | at that.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | Woosh
        
         | gwerbin wrote:
         | They can do it, it's just not "by default", they need to be
         | prompted to do it. So at least the danger is manageable _if_
         | you know what you 're doing and how to prompt around it.
        
           | Bridged7756 wrote:
           | Not really. They're still non deterministic language
           | predictors. Believing that a prompt is an effective way to
           | actually control these machines' actual behavior is really
           | far fetched.
           | 
           | They com like that from factory. Hardcoded to never say no.
        
             | LPisGood wrote:
             | The thing is that they are completely incapable of meta-
             | cognition. Reasoning models don't show their actual
             | reasoning at all.
        
               | DonaldPShimoda wrote:
               | Right -- they're not reasoning, they're generating text
               | that statistically models reasoning. Anyone who says
               | differently is selling something.
        
               | jeremyjh wrote:
               | That is what a base model does. After RL it is a very
               | different thing, and anyone who says they know what it
               | is, is naive or dishonest. These things are grown, not
               | made, and we really do not understand how they work in
               | many important ways.
        
               | LPisGood wrote:
               | Yeah, but they're not magic; we can still do experiments
               | and see what happens. Anthropic did a lot of work on this
               | and showed that they're not accurately describing their
               | reasoning process.
        
               | jeremyjh wrote:
               | Of course, the fact that they have to do that proves my
               | point.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | As the meme goes, "they are the same picture".
        
             | eloisant wrote:
             | They're not hardcoded to never say no, but some of the
             | models were trained to be "yes men" because their creators
             | thought it would be a good property to have. GPT-4o for
             | example.
        
             | wat10000 wrote:
             | _Not_ believing that a prompt is an effective way to
             | actually control their behavior is obviously incorrect to
             | anyone who 's actually used these things.
             | 
             | It's not a _guaranteed_ way to control their behavior, but
             | you can more than move the needle.
        
               | fl4regun wrote:
               | yeah that distinction is pretty important, and in general
               | that guy I believe IS making the point - if you can not
               | control it with guaranteed outcomes - you cannot control
               | it.
        
               | gwerbin wrote:
               | You can't control it any more than you can control a draw
               | from a deck of cards, but you can absolutely control the
               | deck of cards that you choose to draw from.
        
               | ignaloidas wrote:
               | The problem is that nobody really does that? Like, as far
               | as I'm aware, even simple stuff such as not considering
               | tokens that would result in a syntax error when writing
               | code isn't being done.
        
               | fl4regun wrote:
               | magicians can probably make you change your mind on the
               | former
        
               | wat10000 wrote:
               | That's silly. My car is not absolutely guaranteed to turn
               | left when I turn the steering wheel left, but you
               | wouldn't say I can't control my car on that basis.
               | 
               | Steering an LLM with a prompt is way less reliable than
               | steering a car with a steering wheel, but there's still
               | control. It's just not absolute.
        
               | fl4regun wrote:
               | if your car doesn' turn left when you turn the steering
               | wheel left, the problem is that the car is broken, if an
               | LLM does something unexpected after you gave it
               | instructions, that's possible when the LLM is functioning
               | entirely correctly.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | Nothing in this world is guaranteed. That doesn't mean
               | it's uniformly random either. LLMs can still do something
               | unexpected if you give them clear instructions, but that
               | doesn't mean it'll be arbitrary and unpredictable in
               | scope. The same way C/C++ undefined behavior technically
               | means program can give you nasal demons, but in reality
               | it won't do anything unusual (like format your C:/ drive)
               | unless someone purposefully coded it to do that.
        
               | wwweston wrote:
               | The word most relevant to this conversation is
               | "influence." Influence is possible and users observe it
               | and use it to increase margins of useful outcomes.
               | "Control" is incorrect.
        
           | saghm wrote:
           | "Just don't accidentally forget to do the thing that makes it
           | safe" is not a very effective strategy for something that so
           | many vested interests are trying to push into all corners of
           | society. If it's so easy to misuse it, then it shouldn't be
           | used in any context outside of where there are no major
           | consequences for bad output and there's amble opportunity and
           | ability to validate it
        
         | narginal wrote:
         | 2061, mark the date
        
         | ryanjshaw wrote:
         | I reckon that's how we know we've hit ASI.
        
         | cortesoft wrote:
         | There are a lot of humans who refuse to give that answer, too
        
           | Forgeties79 wrote:
           | I don't have to spend dozens if not hundreds of dollars a
           | month to talk to most people in my life lol
        
             | _diyar wrote:
             | Do you _have to_ talk to LLMs?
        
               | vhantz wrote:
               | Another way to say the same thing: "to talk to most
               | people in my life lol I don't have to spend dozens if not
               | hundreds of dollars a month"
        
               | Forgeties79 wrote:
               | According to HN, every employer, and general social
               | chatter, apparently yes.
        
               | prerok wrote:
               | Well, speaking from what I hear and see, employers want
               | you to start using it so that you can be more productive.
               | They've been sold this tool and want you to learn it so
               | that your output will grow.
               | 
               | That's not an unfair take, I think. Again, just IME, they
               | expect too much because the tool is oversold: it does not
               | deliver that well. And we always hear, this new model is
               | so much better, it's tiring.
               | 
               | I think we should all learn to use LLMs but we should
               | still carefully review what they did. And that is what
               | the employers don't quite get: the review still takes a
               | lot of time. So, gains are not 10x but more like... 10%?
               | Maybe 50 for boiler plate. Still gains are there, I
               | guess.
        
               | Forgeties79 wrote:
               | > they expect too much because the tool is oversold: it
               | does not deliver that well.
               | 
               | And unfortunately a lot of people will say it's their
               | reports' fault for not properly utilizing it (even as
               | they barely use it) because otherwise they would have to
               | admit that they bought a tool without any plan for how to
               | deploy it. So regardless of what is or isn't a fair take,
               | the results are the same. We are burdened with utilizing
               | a thing whether it is useful or not and the results are
               | generally not what is measured, but rather "are you using
               | it?"
               | 
               | I'm just glad I work at a company that has more
               | reasonable expectations and has been very slowly,
               | thoughtfully rolling it out to individuals at the company
               | and assessing what is and isn't good for. They are
               | interested in getting me in line, but as somebody in
               | video production to be perfectly honest the use case for
               | Claude is a bit tricky to navigate. We don't write a lot
               | of scripts and I already have bespoke software for
               | organizing/maintaining footage that isn't on a
               | subscription basis. The work I'm also doing doesn't call
               | for these speed-editing solutions that generate tik tok
               | chaff. All our stuff is hours long and it's high volume.
               | Any video-centric AI service costs an arm and a leg.
               | 
               | I do think it could be useful for writing some terminal
               | scripts and such, but as far as a daily tool we are still
               | scratching our heads and thinking about it. But it's nice
               | to be able to do that without somebody saying "why aren't
               | you using it?" every meeting.
        
           | Tallain wrote:
           | This continues to be the most tiring response to any
           | criticism of LLM output. It's pretty much guaranteed to show
           | up at this point. I guess with similar enough input tokens,
           | we're guaranteed the same output...
        
         | otikik wrote:
         | Just add a skill to Claude
        
         | temp0826 wrote:
         | Living in South America a bit really showed me this. I think
         | it's a cultural thing here but someone will always give you an
         | answer, even if it's wrong, _confidently_. It was hard for me
         | at first- I am usually the first person to say  "I don't know"
         | (often followed by "but let's slow down and find a good
         | solution").
        
           | jfaulken wrote:
           | This was similar to my experience running a software team in
           | India (I'm an American) a couple decades ago. I had to learn
           | not to ask yes/no questions because the answer would always
           | be yes.
        
             | HiPhish wrote:
             | It's a long-standing jodke that AI stands for "Actual
             | Indians".
        
             | ponector wrote:
             | From real life: - Is it done? - Yes! But not yet!
        
           | throwaway132448 wrote:
           | Talking about South America as a homogeneous unit is...
           | weird. Even neighbouring countries speaking the same language
           | can be entirely different in this regard.
        
             | temp0826 wrote:
             | I agree (and I don't normally generalize like this, so I
             | apologize). I've spent most of my time in Peru but noticed
             | it in neighboring countries as well.
        
               | wesleyfsmith wrote:
               | can speak from personal experience that it's the same
               | culturally in colombia
        
               | thiagoeh wrote:
               | That also is my perception, from Brazil. There is even
               | the concept of "cordial man", coined by sociologist
               | Sergio Buarque d Holanda, that is connected to this
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordial_man
        
               | croisillon wrote:
               | i remember >20 years ago going to the bus station
               | somewhere between RJ and SP, and asking the best way to
               | get to Iguacu                 - it's difficult       - ok
               | fine but how       - it's difficult       - right i'll
               | see that but how       - it's difficult
               | 
               | then it dawned on me this meant get away you fool :D
        
           | andriy_koval wrote:
           | > someone will always give you an answer, even if it's wrong,
           | confidently
           | 
           | its common playbook for corporate self-development in NA.
        
         | amdivia wrote:
         | Exactly!!
         | 
         | I've been trying to work on a new LLM code editor that does
         | just that. When you instruct it to do something, it will
         | evaluate your request, try to analyze the action part of it,
         | the object, subject, etc, and map them to existing symbols in
         | your codebase or, to expected to be created symbols. If all
         | maps, it proceeds. If the map is incomplete, it errors out
         | stating that your statement contained unresolvable ambiguity
         | 
         | I think there is a real benefit here, and it might be the
         | actual next beneficial grounded AI sustainable use in
         | programming. Since I the current "Claude code and friends" are
         | but a state of drunkenness we fell into after the advent of
         | this new technology, but it will prove, with time, that this is
         | not a sustainable approach
        
         | in-silico wrote:
         | As measured by #_no_answer/(#_incorrect + #_no_answer) the top
         | current models can do it 60-70% of the time (Grok 4.20 is the
         | best with 83%):
         | https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience
        
       | Procrastes wrote:
       | I remember the first time I heard this story. I was maybe 7 at a
       | planetarium and they animated it with music little hand drawn
       | starships and retro computers floating among the stars. They
       | turned the stars all out for the final scene.
        
         | jjoonathan wrote:
         | Outer Wilds vibes! I love it!
         | 
         | (It's a video game that does a brilliant job touching on
         | similar themes to The Last Question. If you liked The Last
         | Question and can fit a video game into your life, you will
         | probably like Outer Wilds. Warning: if you start searching for
         | "outer wilds," the algorithm will aggressively try to spoil
         | you. Progression in the game is gated behind knowledge, so this
         | is worse than usual. If you have trouble resisting the
         | temptation to google past a rough description, it's a sign you
         | should just jump in and play it. End recommendation.)
        
           | monsieurbanana wrote:
           | I... Think you just spoiled me. Somehow I've managed to avoid
           | all information about it so far, but now that you said it's
           | like the last question...
           | 
           | It's on me for procrastinating playing the game for so long,
           | it was bound to happen.
        
             | jjoonathan wrote:
             | "Similar" is doing substantial work. If this is your only
             | clue, it is likely to mislead you for at least 50% of the
             | game, and I strongly suspect you will have fun anyway :)
        
             | cdelsolar wrote:
             | this sorta comes up very very early in the game tho
        
             | SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
             | IMO it's a good enough game that you could read the entire
             | plot summary and it'd _still_ be a good story  & fun game
             | to play. Much like how you can re-read an Agatha Christie
             | novel & still enjoy it, the best stories are spoiler-proof
             | because even when there's a "twist" that "twist" isn't as
             | important to the quality as the rest of the work.
        
           | rationalist wrote:
           | Just doing a simple internet search for the name to see how
           | to get it, brings up descriptions about how after X time, Y
           | happens. Is that a spoiler?
           | 
           | If so, please let us know so that other people do not get
           | spoiled, and can you provide a link or links to the game that
           | doesn't spoil it?
           | 
           | Thank you!
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | After X time, you will die.
             | 
             | There, I said it. The reason I say it openly is because I
             | almost quit the game not understanding _that this is
             | supposed to happen_.
             | 
             | Not really much of a spoiler.
        
             | demurgos wrote:
             | This is a standalone game that needs to be purchased. For
             | PC, it can be acquired through Steam
             | (https://store.steampowered.com/app/753640/Outer_Wilds/).
             | It is also available on consoles, it is not available on
             | mobile. It is playable with keyboard and mouse, but it was
             | primarily created with a game controller in mind.
             | 
             | At it's core, it's a game about exploration to understand
             | what's happening. I recommend looking around and being
             | curious to enjoy it, and avoid rushing. It's my favorite
             | game.
             | 
             | To give you an estimate, I completed the base game with all
             | secrets in about 20-30h. There's also a DLC called "Echoes
             | of Eyes" adding a new area to explore. In total, I spent
             | 45h to fully complete the game.
        
               | rationalist wrote:
               | Thank you, I just bought Outer Wilders: Archeologist
               | Edition for Nintendo Switch, which appears to be the base
               | game plus the expansion.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | (No real spoilers in my comment):
           | 
           | Great game, but if you get stuck for a _long_ time, just look
           | up some spoilers. Multiple times I abandoned the  "right"
           | approach to a problem because I couldn't get it to work and
           | wasted countless hours trying to solve it the wrong way -
           | only to find out I should have stuck to the right approach.
           | 
           | The game doesn't give any guidance, and wasting those hours
           | is not rewarded.
           | 
           | The only other tip I'll give:
           | 
           | When you first play the game, spend the first 1-2 hours on
           | your little planet learning everything (how to maneuver, how
           | to use the signalscope, etc). Once you leave the planet, a
           | timer will start. There is no way to "save" the game. You
           | will die when the timer runs out. Don't panic. That's
           | expected. Don't try to figure out what you did wrong to die -
           | you will die no matter what. The game will restart, but
           | anything you learned in the past will be in your computer's
           | memory for retrieval.
           | 
           | OK, 2 more tips (one I wish someone had told me - I finished
           | the game without it):
           | 
           | 1. You can make time go by if you sleep at the fire.
           | 
           | 2. There is a way to "meditate" until you die. This is very
           | useful when you get stuck and can't get out of somewhere. To
           | find out how to meditate, talk to the people on other planets
           | (you may have to talk more than once before he teaches you).
           | 
           | That's all I'll say.
        
             | ghssds wrote:
             | > (No real spoilers in my comment):
             | 
             | > Proceed to spoil the whole game
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | What did I spoil? That you keep dying? They'll encounter
               | that very early in the game. And if you look around,
               | you'll see that quite a few quit the game because they
               | didn't understand that dying is normal.
               | 
               | The lack of knowledge about the other two items I
               | mentioned are also reasons people stopped playing the
               | game. If you don't know them, the game becomes an
               | incredible _drag_. Even I would have quit if I didn 't
               | know about meditation.
        
               | fwipsy wrote:
               | You revealed the central conceit of the game. In my
               | opinion, discovering that is an important part of the
               | experience of playing the game, even if it's very early,
               | and even though I did find it initially frustrating. The
               | Steam page doesn't reveal that, and they have an
               | incentive to make the Steam page fairly revealing in
               | order to sell you on the game.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | I'm literally one of those people who almost gave up on
               | the game because I didn't understand that dying is
               | normal.
               | 
               | The fact that the game would start all over each time
               | made me think I hadn't progressed enough to save the
               | game. And because the first time round, the timer doesn't
               | really begin until you leave space, I thought I would
               | have to do all the training (jetpack, etc) each time. I
               | remember being _very_ frustrated - I had spent well over
               | an hour playing it and it didn 't even save the game?
               | 
               | And felt the same thing the second time round.
               | 
               | Then I abandoned the game for about a year. The _only_
               | reason I returned to it was because I couldn 't
               | understand why so many would like such a game. So I
               | finally searched online on how to save the game and ...
               | oh, that's why.
               | 
               | As I said, look on various forums, and you'll see
               | _plenty_ of people quitting the game early because they
               | didn 't understand this. There's a whole thread on the
               | subreddit on frustrations of players who recommended the
               | game to friends - a significant percentage quit the game
               | before they got to any of the interesting parts.
               | 
               | I think revealing this is a decent compromise to ensure
               | people will actually play the game.
        
       | RajT88 wrote:
       | Somehow never read this one. But did write a short story ~20
       | years ago with a similar arc. I guess reading a lot of Asimov and
       | Clarke and others will do that to you.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | You should. It's short and it's one of Asimov's best.
        
           | RajT88 wrote:
           | I did! That is how I know the arc is similar.
        
       | jjice wrote:
       | An absolute classic! Was just telling a buddy about this one the
       | other day while talking about The Egg by Andy Weir (another short
       | story I really enjoy). Every time I read this one, I get chills
       | at the end. Asimov really was a master.
        
         | ANTHONY6632 wrote:
         | Totally agree, that ending sticks with you for a long time.
         | Asimov had a way of making simple ideas feel massive.
        
         | jimmydddd wrote:
         | It's amazing that in the late 1930's, someone with his academic
         | credentials and intellect decided his life would be best spent
         | writing science fiction.
        
           | us-merul wrote:
           | I looked this up on Wikipedia. It seems that he was working
           | as an instructor (not a professor) of chemistry; since he was
           | making more money as a writer during that time, he slowed
           | down or stopped his research. Doesn't seem to have been an
           | intentional choice so much as how things happened to turn
           | out.
        
             | triceratops wrote:
             | > he was working as an instructor (not a professor)
             | 
             | No he eventually became a full professor too.
             | 
             | "He began work in 1949 with a $5,000 salary(equivalent to
             | $68,000 in 2025), maintaining this position for several
             | years. By 1952, however, he was making more money as a
             | writer than from the university, and he eventually stopped
             | doing research, confining his university role to lecturing
             | students.[g] In 1955, he was promoted to tenured associate
             | professor. In December 1957, Asimov was dismissed from his
             | teaching post, with effect from June 30, 1958, due to his
             | lack of research. After a struggle over two years, he
             | reached an agreement with the university that he would keep
             | his title and give the opening lecture each year for a
             | biochemistry class. On October 18, 1979, the university
             | honored his writing by promoting him to full professor of
             | biochemistry."
        
               | us-merul wrote:
               | Yes that's true, but I was referring to the line where it
               | said he was making more money as a writer, which was
               | before he became a tenured professor. In any case, we're
               | both addressing the point that he did have an academic
               | career aside from writing.
        
               | utopcell wrote:
               | > In 1955, he was promoted to tenured associate
               | professor. In December 1957, Asimov was dismissed from
               | his teaching post, with effect from June 30, 1958, due to
               | his lack of research.
               | 
               | I thought the whole point of getting tenure is that you
               | can't get fired.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | I've read his biography. It was definitely intentional -
             | and of course making a living by writing was a big factor.
             | But he just didn't like the academic environment or his
             | colleagues.
        
           | triceratops wrote:
           | He had an academic career too, becoming a tenured professor
           | at age 35 at Boston University. Writing just paid better.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov#Education_and_car.
           | ..
        
           | wat10000 wrote:
           | Per Wikipedia, he published 40 novels and over 280 non-
           | fiction books. He's best known for SF but he certainly didn't
           | spend his whole career on it.
        
             | triceratops wrote:
             | > He's best known for SF but he certainly didn't spend his
             | whole career on it.
             | 
             | Indeed after becoming a giant of the field in the 1940s and
             | 1950s, when he wrote most of the novels and short stories
             | we know him for (Robots, Foundation and Empire) he took a
             | long hiatus. In the 1960s and 70s, as far as I can tell,
             | his meager sci-fi output consisted of some short stories, a
             | couple of novelizations of sci-fi movies, and a standalone
             | novel ( _The Gods Themselves_ ).
             | 
             | After Sputnik he focused on science writing, believing that
             | to be more widely useful.
             | 
             | He only returned to writing more Foundation, Robots, and
             | Empire novels in the 1980s.
        
           | glerk wrote:
           | What do you think would have been more valuable for him to
           | do? His sci-fi books had a huge impact, and not only on sci-
           | fi and literature, they literally changed people's lives.
           | People decided to pursue a career in science or technology
           | because they read these books when they were kids.
        
           | Henchman21 wrote:
           | Who are you exactly to take a shit on someone else's choices?
        
         | m-p-3 wrote:
         | The Jaunt by Stephen King is another of my favorite
         | 
         | https://readsonlinefree.com/stephen-king/308254-the_jaunt
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jaunt
        
       | ANTHONY6632 wrote:
       | I like the concept, has anyone tried this in production?
        
         | appplication wrote:
         | Running it now but don't have sufficient data to make a
         | recommendation yet
        
       | OhMeadhbh wrote:
       | In the 80s, our local planetarium did a show based on this story.
       | The executive director of the museum associated with the
       | planetarium had a very nice deep voice and was the perfect
       | narrator, though it gave the Cosmic AC a slight Texas accent.
        
       | breuleux wrote:
       | > How may entropy be reversed?
       | 
       | Considering AC could persist indefinitely in hyperspace while
       | interacting with normal matter, the answer would appear to be
       | "hyperspace", whatever that is.
        
         | mock-possum wrote:
         | "Build god, then we'll talk."
        
       | antirez wrote:
       | I'm happy to see this short story posted here, it is one that I
       | deeply loved when I was 14 or alike, and read it again multiple
       | times. But I wonder: how did it survive in those sites without
       | being shut down by the Asimov writings copyright holders? Given
       | that the story is short and highly shared, it was just tolerated?
       | 
       | EDIT: actually I see that the link historically posted here more
       | often is now dead: multivax.com/last_question.html
        
         | sigalo wrote:
         | I was wondering the same. All the links to Asimov stories I've
         | bookmarked in the past are now dead, so there probably is some
         | enforcement of copyright.
        
       | satvikpendem wrote:
       | And then read Asimov's The Last Answer, good dichotomy of
       | stories.
        
       | triceratops wrote:
       | "This is by far my favorite story of all those I have written.
       | 
       | After all, I undertook to tell several trillion years of human
       | history in the space of a short story and I leave it to you as to
       | how well I succeeded. I also undertook another task, but I won't
       | tell you what that was lest l spoil the story for you.
       | 
       | It is a curious fact that innumerable readers have asked me if I
       | wrote this story. They seem never to remember the title of the
       | story or (for sure) the author, except for the vague thought it
       | might be me. But, of course, they never forget the story itself
       | especially the ending. The idea seems to drown out everything --
       | and I'm satisfied that it should. " - Isaac Asimov
       | 
       | https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html
        
       | butz wrote:
       | Color me surprised, when gemma-4 provided this answer: "Based on
       | our current understanding of the universe, the short answer is
       | no, it is not possible."
        
       | hnthrowaway0315 wrote:
       | I tried to ask ChatGPT the same question last year. Unfortunately
       | it didn't give me a meaningful answer.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | That's because it's a DC, not an AC.
        
       | shivaniShimpi_ wrote:
       | the thing that gets me every reread is the structure of the joke.
       | same question, asked across the entire lifespan of the universe,
       | same answer every time. asimov could have made it tragic but
       | instead it reads almost like a bit that keeps escalating and then
       | the punchline is that the answer was always going to come, just
       | on a timeline so absurd it laps back around to funny
        
       | throw_m239339 wrote:
       | Check out "The Last Answer" from the same author.
        
       | bilsbie wrote:
       | I tell my kids, there's a God out there for everyone.
       | 
       | The last question God might be for you If you're super rational
       | and are really into technology.
       | 
       | Belief in God is like a supermarket. Once you decide to enter
       | you're probably going to find something that works for you.
        
         | fellowniusmonk wrote:
         | The funny thing is this, let's say that an entity is outside of
         | time, an entity that maps 1:1 in every practical way to the
         | theists God.
         | 
         | Putting aside the bidirectional issues of non-interaction, what
         | if mankind, or the universes collection of agents (if there are
         | others and we interact with them) at some future point manages
         | to create a supercomputer or entity in a substrate that exists
         | outside of our time in the causal sense.
         | 
         | As long as we don't apocalypse ourselves or self destruct or
         | get distracted from self preservation and miss the asteroid
         | that ends us - we end up bringing this thing in our imagination
         | to reality, just like all the other stuff we imagined and
         | subsequently made.
         | 
         | Maybe God is real we just haven't made it yet.
         | 
         | This is all imagination of course, a fun thought about
         | possibilities, humans tend to make the things they imagine and
         | desire if it's actually possible.
        
         | wat10000 wrote:
         | How does this fit with those of us who found one, then later on
         | decided it was silly and gave up the whole idea?
        
           | bilsbie wrote:
           | Good question. Perhaps you found the wrong one?
           | 
           | I mean there's such a wide selection you can even believe in
           | simulations these days.
           | 
           | Or if that's still too much there's always the Pascal's wager
           | God. Still better than nothing.
        
             | wat10000 wrote:
             | Why bother, though? What does trying to believe in this
             | ill-defined entity do for me?
        
             | TuringTest wrote:
             | I find Pascal's wager is of the same nature as Aquinas'
             | Five Ways to prove God, or accelerationists about the
             | inevitability of a Singularity: believing that your own
             | rational argument can be the basis to prove a fact about
             | reality merely because it feels internally consistent.
             | 
             | Needless to say, I don't find them at all convincing. This
             | 'nothing' is much better than catching unconvincing
             | unneeded supernatural entities.
        
               | wat10000 wrote:
               | The Wager doesn't attempt to prove God, it merely states
               | that you might as well worship, because the cost is small
               | and the potential payoff is huge.
               | 
               | It falls apart because, based on what's actually known,
               | there's no reason to think worshipping might be the thing
               | that condemns you to hell, and not doing so gets you into
               | heaven, rather than the other way around.
        
       | sergiotapia wrote:
       | Every time this surfaces I simply must read it end to end. I must
       | have read it 200 times by now and it never gets old. What a
       | wonderful short story!
       | 
       | I consider these other two also great stories that I must read
       | every time:
       | 
       | I Don't Know, Timmy, Being God Is a Big Responsibility
       | 
       | https://qntm.org/responsibilit
       | 
       | Gorge
       | 
       | https://qntm.org/gorge
        
       | sigalo wrote:
       | Shouldn't the guy who runs this site be concerned about copyright
       | infringement? Not sure to what extent the Asimov estate cracks
       | down on unauthorized copies but he should be cautious.
        
         | sowbug wrote:
         | It would be borderline insanity for the Asimov estate to
         | enforce rights in a case like this. You couldn't buy better
         | publicity than this thread.
        
       | hackan wrote:
       | Every single time this is posted, I read it again, and again. And
       | I will, for the next billion years...
        
       | globular-toast wrote:
       | I've read it countless times. It still brought a tear to my eye.
        
       | nahuel0x wrote:
       | I remembered this short story recently while reading Ilyenkov
       | "Cosmology of the Spirit", also from 1950s but only published in
       | 1980s (
       | https://static1.squarespace.com/static/588bcd399f74561e5f64a... )
        
       | thatoneengineer wrote:
       | If you like this kind of thing, try reading Star Maker by Olaf
       | Stapledon. Similar themes, full novel, even older. It makes for
       | interesting reading in that it more obviously represents a "path
       | not taken" by science fiction (and by science?!) but still has
       | that early-sci-fi spirit of fundamental curiosity.
        
         | nahuel0x wrote:
         | Seconded, but note some paths were taken (at least partially),
         | as in some way is a meta-book were each paragraph comprises an
         | idea that deserves a full book on its own. Some Stapledon
         | readers were clearly inspired by it, e.g. Dyson spheres were
         | first postulated there, and Borges got the "The Garden of
         | Forking Paths" idea also from it.. and also Virtual Reality
         | (not bad for 1937!) . Asimov was also an Stapledon admirer and
         | he said that Stapledon expanded s.f. to a cosmic scale, so I
         | think that Stapledon influence is also very present in The Last
         | Question.
        
       | donatj wrote:
       | There's a comic of this that circulated a number of years ago
       | that I thoroughly enjoyed.
       | 
       | https://imgur.com/gallery/last-question-9KWrH
        
         | ColinWright wrote:
         | Ah:                   Content Not Available         Content not
         | available in your region.         Learn more about Imgur access
         | in the United Kingdom
        
           | pcrh wrote:
           | Alternate source for the comic:
           | 
           | https://www.behance.net/gallery/102075221/The-Last-Question
        
             | ColinWright wrote:
             | Thank you ...
        
             | utopcell wrote:
             | This is not an alternative source for the comic, it's a
             | whole different comic. Cool!
        
       | dark-star wrote:
       | Just putting this here for people who never heard of him:
       | 
       | If you like Asimov's short stories, you might also like Robert
       | Sheckley's short stories. I had a phase where I binged on sci-fi
       | short stories, and Sheckleys and Asimov's were always at the top
       | of my list
        
       | reader_x wrote:
       | Love this story.
       | 
       | On this read, I noticed Multivac answers 7x adding a few more
       | words, maybe to imply progress toward its final answer:
       | 
       | INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
       | 
       | INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
       | 
       | THERE IS INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER.
       | 
       | THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER. (4x)
       | 
       | LET THERE BE LIGHT!
        
       | winrid wrote:
       | My favorite Sci-Fi AI is probably in Larry Niven's World of
       | Ptavvs, the "brain board". It's not covered in much depth but I
       | like it because it's basically vibe coding GPT3.5 from 1966:
       | 
       | > He read, "Time to recharge battery:" followed by the spiral
       | hieroglyph, the sign of infinity.
       | 
       | > Thud, said the brain. Kzanol read, "Re-estimate of trip time to
       | Thrintun:" followed by a spiral.
       | 
       | At the brain board he typed: "Compute a course for any civilized
       | planet, minimum trip time. Give trip time."
       | 
       | ...
       | 
       | Thud! The screen said, "No solution."
       | 
       | Nonsense! The battery had a tremendous potential, even after a
       | hyperspace jump it must still have enough energy to aim the ship
       | at some civilized planet. Why would the brain...?
       | 
       | Then he understood. The ship had power, probably, to reach
       | several worlds, but not to slow him down to the speed of any
       | known world. Well, that was all right. In his stasis field Kzanol
       | wouldn't care how hard he hit. He typed: "Do not consider
       | decrease of velocity upon arrival. Plot course for any civilized
       | planet. Minimize trip time."
       | 
       | The answer took only a few seconds. "Trip time to Awtprun 72
       | Thrintun years 100.48 days."
        
       | mentalgear wrote:
       | One of my fav scifi short stories for being a fine narrative
       | describing the concept of a cyclical universe.
        
       | ChocMontePy wrote:
       | It has similarities to a very, very short story by Fredric Brown
       | published two years before. It was called 'Answer' and is only
       | 252 words long:
       | 
       | https://www.roma1.infn.it/~anzel/answer.html
        
         | utopcell wrote:
         | Good. So we have a super short story and a short story. Someone
         | should write a book now.
        
       | quux wrote:
       | > Adell was just drunk enough to try, just sober enough to be
       | able to phrase the necessary symbols and operations into a
       | question which, in words, might have corresponded to this:
       | 
       | TIL Asimov predicted the Ballmer Peak in 1956
        
       | LetsGetTechnicl wrote:
       | One of my favorite short stories
        
       | astravagrant wrote:
       | What an absolute masterpiece. Poetry and philosophy with
       | narrative and humour. Wonderful stuff. Him and Clarke were
       | lighthouses in their day, and to this day.
        
       | rootbear wrote:
       | One of Asimov's best. I've often thought of naming a computer
       | "multivac", as I'm a fan of the first generation computer names
       | like ENIAC, EDSAC, etc. Multivac was, of course, a play on
       | UNIVAC, suggesting multiple vacuum tubes instead of one! Multivac
       | is, however, depicted as so powerful, I just don't think I've
       | ever owned a system that deserved that name.
        
       | elhosots wrote:
       | When i first read this story as a teenager in 1971 it started me
       | on the road to atheism. Im very thankful to dr asimov not only
       | for his great science fiction but his chemistry teachings as well
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | "Answer" (1954) [1] Much faster results.
       | 
       | [1] https://calumchace.com/favourite-relevant-sf-short-story/
        
       | nine_k wrote:
       | As a side note: the scientist who first suggested that the
       | Universe expands and thus must have an explicit beginning was
       | also a Catholic priest:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre
        
       | sprior wrote:
       | I saw this at a planetarium show when I was young, I think it was
       | at the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia. It has always stuck
       | with me.
        
       | daveisfera wrote:
       | Also recommend The Egg by Andy Weir
       | https://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html
        
       | BFV wrote:
       | right now making no sense
        
       | andyjohnson0 wrote:
       | I'm going to make myself unpopular here, but I've never
       | understood the perennial gushing about this story on hn.
       | 
       | The writing is okay, but the ending is kind of trite (especially
       | given the author's humanist beliefs. And there's much too much
       | exposition.
       | 
       | Convince me I'm wrong.
        
         | Nav_Panel wrote:
         | Nah I agree with you, as someone who's read a lot of Asimov. As
         | far as MULTIVAC stories go, I always preferred "All The
         | Troubles of the World" (https://schools.ednet.ns.ca/avrsb/070/r
         | sbennett/HORTON/short...).
        
         | hungryhobbit wrote:
         | Context matters. The first guy to write X is a luminary. The
         | next 50 people to write variations of X start falling along a
         | spectrum, from luminary to hack. After that, everyone except
         | children have been exposed to X, and anyone writing about it
         | seems trite.
         | 
         | I suspect you've read a lot of works derived from Asimov, and
         | now the original seems trite (when you read it after all the
         | stuff derived from it). But the work remains foundational.
        
           | andyjohnson0 wrote:
           | The triteness was more in the ending than the overall
           | exposition. Humans create computer, computer creates
           | universe->humans.
           | 
           | > I suspect you've read a lot of works derived from Asimov
           | 
           | You're probably right, although the transitive chain of
           | derivation is necessarily long. Clarke - probably not
           | derivative. Blish and Cherryh (some), Stapeton, Lem, Heinlein
           | (the juveniles, as a kid), Baxter, Banks, Gibson, Ken
           | MacLeod, Charles Stross, Peter Watts... I dunno.
           | 
           | I did grind through the Robot books as a child, and the
           | Foundation books that he wrote. But just because they're
           | foundational (no pun intended) doesn't stop them feeling
           | stuffy and dated now.
           | 
           | (And as an aside, it strikes me now that Clarke's _The Nine
           | Billion Names of God_ is kind of the anti-particle to _The
           | Last Question_.)
        
       | hydrocomplete wrote:
       | No one should have to wait a trillion years for good data. Too
       | long!
        
       | itmitica wrote:
       | In school, humans rarely answer with "I don't know" when faced by
       | teachers.
       | 
       | LLMs are the same, to that regard, they answer to the best of
       | their abilities.
       | 
       | It's ones individual job to inform and reason. The problem
       | solving in school is about that. Lean into your formal education.
       | It tells you learning gets harder and harder and it never stops.
       | 
       | This is a novel. It's not an absolute truth, it's anecdotal and
       | basic, simplified to make a point majority will understand. It
       | sounds like truth only if you never question written knowledge.
       | You should. Asimov wrote that to the best of its abilities. He
       | explored. He opened a conversation, he did not hand a verdict in.
        
       | viktorcode wrote:
       | Curiously, that describes cyclic universe hypothesis by dr.
       | Penrose pretty well
        
       | HerbManic wrote:
       | The last line in this context "Let there be light" always reminds
       | me of the film Dark Star. Where they are arguing with the AI on a
       | planet destroying bomb only for the bomb to argue from a
       | Solipsistic point of view.
        
       | utopcell wrote:
       | I wonder: Is a resurface of "The Last Question" ever complete
       | without mentioning "Universal Paperclips" [1]?
       | 
       | [1] https://www.decisionproblem.com/paperclips/index2.html
        
         | eek2121 wrote:
         | oh no...not again...;)
        
       | charonn0 wrote:
       | If you enjoy this story, you _might_ enjoy the short unpublished
       | novel,  "The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect"[1] by Roger
       | Williams. A story where 1990's humans invent a 3-laws-compliant
       | super AI that accidentally "ascends" humanity. We become as gods,
       | or the Q Continuum, but remain a grievously savage child race.
       | Not to spoil it, but the ending also has a broadly similar shape
       | to The Last Question.
       | 
       | I say you _might_ enjoy it, because this story has graphic
       | depictions of deviant sex and gruesome violence, to a disturbing
       | degree at points. But I argue that it 's not gratuitous; it's the
       | logical conclusion of Rule 34 being applied to the situation.
       | Even so, you don't want to read this if you are sensitive to
       | themes like rape, murder, incest or abuse.
       | 
       | [1]:
       | https://archive.org/download/prime_intellect/prime_intellect...
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related. Others?
       | 
       |  _' The Last Question' [Isaac Asimov; 1956]_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41971740 - Oct 2024 (3
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question by Issac Asimov [pdf]_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31743151 - June 2022 (74
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31675727 - June 2022 (164
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question (1956)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18839078 - Jan 2019 (18
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Asimov: The Last Question (1956)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15691277 - Nov 2017 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10146821 - Aug 2015 (5
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question by Isaac Asimov (1956)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8376716 - Sept 2014 (18
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5584807 - April 2013 (63
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question - Isaac Asimov_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3691113 - March 2012 (41
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question by Isaac Asimov -- 1956_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2467703 - April 2011 (5
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question by Isaac Asimov_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1485286 - July 2010 (23
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _" The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1290590 - April 2010 (7
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The Last Question -- Isaac Asimov_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=595419 - May 2009 (24
       | comments)
       | 
       | (Reposts are fine after a year or so, and in the case of
       | perennials like this one, it's good to have a thread every once
       | in a while so new user cohorts learn the classics.)
        
       | msuvakov wrote:
       | It's striking how ending of the story mirrors Roger Penrose's
       | conformal cyclic cosmology, where the heat death of one universe
       | mathematically resets through conformal scaling to become the big
       | bang of the next.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-17 23:00 UTC)