Can you think of examples of technology that directly attempt to emulate fictional technology seen in Science Fiction works? Among them, how many of them actually became successful products?
I suppose Google Glass and other VR stuff are among the few actual examples, and even then the claim is somewhat controversial.
There are plenty of examples of fictional descriptions of technology preceding the actual tech: easily going back to Jules Verne's submarines. But usually it's not very scientific nor practical to emulate fiction.
Interesting! Are there any instances you can think of where the creator/lead developer directly states that they were attempting to emulate something that they saw, or read in fiction?
I'd say that pretty much anything space related.
automatic doors -> star trek
flip phones -> star trek
lasers -> war of the worlds
submarines -> 20k leagues under the sea
helicopter -> Clipper of the Clouds
rocket ->War of the Worlds
atomic bomb -> The World Set Free
taser -> Tom Swift
quicktime -> star trek
tablets -> startrek
universal translaters (google's voice to text/translate/voice synth) -> STAAAAAR TREEEEKKKKK
hologram communication -> star wars
roomba -> jetsons
earbuds -> Fahrenheit 451
portable ultrasound -> STAR BLAH BLAH STREKIDY AAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
I've worked with designers who've drawn inspiration from popular fictional works. UI and industrial design. But they'd never admit to copying anything, and those are examples of the look and feel of the product mimicing something that was witnessed in fiction, rather than the function.
Home automation might be relevant - automated houses were largely fiction in the last century.
One product that should be mentioned is Cortana.
I wonder, though. Are these coincidences, or direct attempts to emulate the future-tech? I mean, The Jetsons had video chat long before Skype. Does that mean that Skype was influenced by The Jetsons? That's what I'm trying to find out.
If there's an actual quote from one of the developers of these devices that suggests that they were directly attempting to emulate the functionality of their fictional counterparts, then I've got the perfect lead for my research!
>This is actually my first time here on /g/ and you guys are showing that you're quite the helpful bunch! Thanks for all of your input so far!
Don't be fooled. This place is a cesspit.
SEE THIS SHIT IS WHY WE'RE USUALLY ASSHOLES BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT YOU COMIGN HERE SHITTING THE PLACE US
WEEEE THOUGHT YOU WERE STARTING A THREAD ABOUT INTERESTING IDEAS NOT DOING YOUR FUCKING RESEARCH FOR YOU FAGGOT
I didn't ask anyone to do research for anyone. Yes, I'm writing an essay on the subject. All I asked is if anyone knew, off the top of their heads, if they knew of any direct, confirmed relationships between science fiction and science fact.
Assignment, or not, I do think that it is an interesting topic of discussion. Is it not?
As a matter of fact, I made that clear up-top right here. Your fault for not reading. I was never trying to ruse anyone. I chose this topic of study because I am interested in it. Yes, this discussion has helped me get an idea of where I'd like to start with my essay, but that doesn't mean that I don't wish to discuss the topic further simply for the sake of discussion.
ignore that guy
just don't let it be known that's why you're asking next time
incidentally there's a video from 1988 where Isaac Azimov predicted the world wide web
a full year before it was even a proposal
The touch screens in Star Trek: The Next Generation were a big deal back in the day. I remember watching a behind the scenes special that discussed if they were ever going to be feasible.
Wow! This is actually really fascinating! I knew before I even began researching that I'd come across Azimov at some point, but this is really something special. I tell ya.
Pic related. 1984. And that's not considering same-setting short-stories he released in magazines in the preceding years
Video chatting. Apple directly copied the call starting animation from Back to the Future into iChat and FaceTime
They are not coincidence and they are not emulation. They are cases of sci fi writers being reasonably good futurists. Sci Fi tech is often based on reasonable, logical predictions. They are often quite wrong about how long things will take, what order things will happen in, and so on, but it doesn't take a genius to know that certain things will be possible eventually, and that there will be a market for them, and so they will probably exist at some point.
Video-calling hardly "exists" though. Not in the way sci-fi predicted.
Sure. It's a very real thing and I could video-call my friends if I wanted to. But I don't. We're all sticking to voice calls
These are fantastic instances of brilliant writers predicting the future of technology. This is some solid evidence supporting that it is, indeed, possible to predict future systems before they are even proposed through the medium of science fiction!
But, perhaps, that's only half of the equation?
If it can be verified that these same technologies were influenced by the fictional works that predicted their development and use in the FIRST place then we truly have an instance of fictional technology being directly responsible for the development of future technology!
God, if that sequence of
Prediction -> Inspiration -> Development
holds true for something as big as the touch screen, for example, then that's a really big fuckin' deal, in't it?
So what? I'm not saying that every work of science fiction ever has come true exactly or is going to. I'm saying that Sci Fi writers put thought into what the future is going to be like, and so it's not surprising that some of it, whether partially or completely, comes true, eventually, sort of. Anyone who understands science and technology and keeps up with bleeding edge developments could to it reasonably well, but nobody can do it perfectly.
I actually love how Azimov continues to talk about how people think that being a man means no longer learning, these days we mock people who don't keep up with modern information
god the past must have sucked ass
>The first regular episode ("The Man Trap") of Star Trek: The Original Series aired on Thursday, September 8, 1966.
>E.A. Johnson described his work on capacitive touch screens in a short article which is published in 1965
Early research was being done at the time that the show originally aired. A big part of being good at making predictions for Sci Fi is simply being familiar with contemporary bleeding edge research.
I found that too, Anon! It seems like, in this case, the fiction and fact were being developed in parallel. My next question I've been thinking about is then can we attribute the SUCCESS of the touch screen to Star Trek's interpretation? Were people attracted to idea because it reminded them of something from science fiction?
Can we predict that Windows 10's hologram headset will receive a similar boost of popularity because, with it, people can pretend they're Tony Stark in Iron Man? I think that's another important point. Even if we can emulate future tech, its success in the market is also an important factor.
>My next question I've been thinking about is then can we attribute the SUCCESS of the touch screen to Star Trek's interpretation? Were people attracted to idea because it reminded them of something from science fiction?
I don't think so. I can think of a few cases where that didn't happen, like video calling and microwave ovens, but none where it did.
One thing I can think of that might actually only exist because somebody saw it on TV is smart watches, but I don't see them every achieving ubiquity.
I hope they succeed.
Couldn't give less of a fuck about smart watches myself, but since our technological process is now completely consumer driven, smart watches are going to speed up the miniaturization of tech quite a bit.
Not to mention a need for better low power processors and better battery tech.