t the end of time, a miracle endangers a vast refugee fleet. Part I of the Beacon Saga.
They call it the Shroud, and Beacon is the only star that survived its wrath. At this endpoint of existence, humanity lingers on alongside every living species. Layers of orbiting ships can provide you everything—except children. So when Mally and Tersias conceive, they are instant celebrities, lavished with accolades and gifts. But their act will carry a high cost, starting with the return of a specter from the past. And the end will become the beginning.
A serial installment of six thousand words. Parts II (twelve thousand words) and III (fourteen thousand words) also available. Part IV coming soon.
I've murdered mine as well. I have my Paperwhite (Second Generation) and I have mostly technical books fill my shelves. There are a few fictions but not as many in my electronic library.
I understand exactly what Ms. Grant is stating in this beautifully written essay. I have so many friends who say they love their books. Then they movie and realize there is a cost to keeping so many in physical form.
I have a library that is larger than anything that I have ever owned. Besides the 30 to 50 odd physical books, there are at least 400+ fiction, non-fiction, and technical books in my electronic library in my computer. In my mind my library is a large beautiful room where I go to read those 400+ books.
My only wish, interchangeability of the books electronic formats and the removal of all DRM.
Asimov is one of the greats for his ideas, if not exactly his prose. There's a lot to quibble about with respect to the artistry in this book — in particular, the yawn-worthy, pseudo-Socratic exposition (only a scientist could think that two scientists talking to each other makes for a fascinating story). But getting past those stylistic inadequacies, and a few anachronisms, it's still interesting to think about the technical, ethical, social and political problems presented by robots and "machine men."
One of the things that struck me as odd is the persistent insistence by characters — who are typically scientists or engineers — to call various outcomes or reasonings "impossible," only to be shown that such outcomes or reasonings are, in fact, quite possible. I have not decided yet whether this repetition is a grand insight on Asimov's part, i.e., a commentary on the tendency of humans to set …
Asimov is one of the greats for his ideas, if not exactly his prose. There's a lot to quibble about with respect to the artistry in this book — in particular, the yawn-worthy, pseudo-Socratic exposition (only a scientist could think that two scientists talking to each other makes for a fascinating story). But getting past those stylistic inadequacies, and a few anachronisms, it's still interesting to think about the technical, ethical, social and political problems presented by robots and "machine men."
One of the things that struck me as odd is the persistent insistence by characters — who are typically scientists or engineers — to call various outcomes or reasonings "impossible," only to be shown that such outcomes or reasonings are, in fact, quite possible. I have not decided yet whether this repetition is a grand insight on Asimov's part, i.e., a commentary on the tendency of humans to set artificial boundaries against their own imaginations, or whether it is simply a quirk of the author to need characters who express objection in the superlative to provide some level of tension in an otherwise rather mundane and technical conversation.
Much is made of Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics," which are invoked significantly throughout the stories in this book. While I've run across the laws in others of Asimov's stories, I was a little dismayed to find that in this book they aren't treated quite as rigorously as I had been led to believe. In fact, there seems to be some inconsistency in how exactly the laws function. In some of the stories, it is stated that the laws are, somehow, integral parts of the positronic brain, and that it is "impossible" (there's that word again) for robots not to follow them. In other stories, we got robots who are deliberately modified to ignore parts of the three laws or who are damaged in some way so as to not be able to follow the laws appropriately. I suppose one could explain "positronic inherency vs. programmatic function" with a "nature vs. nurture" metaphor — but I'm not sure it quite works.
Overall, this is a decent collection that mostly holds up. If nothing else, it provides some insight into the ideas that science fiction writers in the early to mid 20th century were thinking about. If they take a different form than today's ideas, well, we can't blame them for that....
Incidentally, it's unfortunate that the terrible, terrible Will Smith movie is featured on the cover of this edition, not only because the movie itself sucked, but also because it has almost nothing to do with any of the stories in this book, beyond a common title.
I, Robot is a collection of Isaac Asimov's earliest Robot stories. It's one of those classic, almost legendary books. Which pretty much makes it impossible to review properly.
The first thing it's important to note is that these stories are old. The book was published in the 50s and it contained short stories that Asimov had written in the 40's. And inevitably that age shows.
The descriptions of the robots seems quaint. The failure to anticipate that computers would be commonplace long before sophisticated robots. These are the sort of things that are inevitable when you're dealing with near future science fiction written sixty or more years ago. As perhaps is the mannerisms of the characters.
Putting that aside though, the format of these stories is fairly predictable. In each case a puzzle is set up. One that has something to do with the Three Laws of Robotics. And by …
I, Robot is a collection of Isaac Asimov's earliest Robot stories. It's one of those classic, almost legendary books. Which pretty much makes it impossible to review properly.
The first thing it's important to note is that these stories are old. The book was published in the 50s and it contained short stories that Asimov had written in the 40's. And inevitably that age shows.
The descriptions of the robots seems quaint. The failure to anticipate that computers would be commonplace long before sophisticated robots. These are the sort of things that are inevitable when you're dealing with near future science fiction written sixty or more years ago. As perhaps is the mannerisms of the characters.
Putting that aside though, the format of these stories is fairly predictable. In each case a puzzle is set up. One that has something to do with the Three Laws of Robotics. And by the end our protagonists have figured out what conflict or combination of the laws is causing the robot to behave as it does.
Individually these stories are really not that compelling. The world building is minimal (with the exception of the last story The Evitable Conflict) and only Evidence really connected with me on its own merits.
Taken as a whole though. As an exploration of the Three Laws. As a foundation for what was to come. This is essential reading. Not Asimov's best work by any means but a sign of the future. And not just in his own works. The Three Laws are now embedded in popular culture. You can't really address robots without touching on those laws.
Like the early Foundation books, there's a great mix of prescience and persistence of early 50's values and culture. As the age of information engulfs us, I'm surprised that the central issue in this book - how to keep control of the machines - hasn't reached our cultural consciousness yet.
