Forum: Story Recommendations

"Johnny Got His Gun" comes to mind...

...in real life but you've read in a story and thought it was super cool?

Living forever. Or even for the next 20 years. Things are going to get really, really bad soon. I have changed my will so that instead of relatives inheriting, whatever money might be left will go to some teen age kids to help fund their escape to some remote place. This is real, but might make a good story, as well.

Living forever.

Seen more than a few stories that didn't make it out to be really cool. Canticle of Liebowitz? L.E.Modesitt touched on the downside of extended existence a few times. The Forever War covered the downside of outliving the society you were accustomed to.

Haldeman's work is the best exploration of the effect of time dilation on a man that I've read. It easily beats Niven's Rammer. Haldeman makes his characters believably human, while Niven had more imaginative / way out scenarios.
I read it when it was serialized in Analog. He used the pen name Tak Hallus. Which translates as Pen Name.

I read it when it was serialized in Analog.

I read it quite a bit later. One other really nicely written piece looking at relative timeframes was Dragon's Egg. (I read it maybe a month after The Forever War.)

The Forever War is in my personal top 10 scifi books. Several points of the book, I consider almost prescient in regards to society.

Sounds like you suspect the liberal elite's pushing of the LGBTQ agenda is related to their population control (re: limiting numbers of people rather than limiting freedoms of people, confusing as they love both) aims. (Kinda like how they want zero technology, so orders of magnitude less people could survive on available food. Or 'respect the rights' of anti-vax morons to try to increase death by disease.)

Living forever

Do you mean Living for ever alone? cause i don't think it would be so bad if you had someone with you. i also saw someone write that it would be scary to out live the society you've grown accustomed to but because you are immortal wouldn't you be able to steer said society to what you believe it should be? When you say living forever do you mean reincarnatining with your entire mind intact or do you mean your body continues to survive as well?

In my mind, living forever on this earth would be a curse. Though I don't fear it as it's not going to happen. At least not on this earth.

The human mind is not built for such a reality. Should some technology make it possible, the person would likely no longer be human, at least not psychologically.

Do you mean Living for ever alone? cause i don't think it would be so bad if you had someone with you.

Only if that companion was also immortal.

i also saw someone write that it would be scary to out live the society you've grown accustomed to but because you are immortal wouldn't you be able to steer said society to what you believe it should be?

No, just being immortal with no other power wouldn't put you in a position to steer society.

I disagree, but you'd have to be smart about it and accept that it would be a constant 'two steps forward, one step back' type of struggle.

An immortal could potentially get himself into a position to steer society, but obtaining such a position would not necessarily follow simply from being immortal.

Do you mean Living for ever alone? cause i don't think it would be so bad if you had someone with you.

Having someone with you would be worse. Watching them age and die, while you keep on ticking, is sad enough if they're your grandparent or parent, but that's pretty much expected. Now imagine if it's your wife, child, or grandchild who is old, frail, and dying.

Having someone with you would be worse. Watching them age and die

what i meant to ask. what i meant to ask was what if they were immortal along with you? now you have someone who loves you along with you... ya know?

because you are immortal wouldn't you be able to steer said society to what you believe it should be?

No, more likely than not, you would need to keep a very low profile, making few friends and avoiding any public notoriety. You'd have to invent yourself over and over again, probably doing menial labor, to avoid being captured, examined, and dissected.

No politics for you.

to avoid being captured, examined, and dissected.

And if you are genuinely immortal, they could dissect you over and over...

Do you think it would be fun spending the next 100 year getting dissected on a daily basis?

No, more likely than not, you would need to keep a very low profile, making few friends and avoiding any public notoriety.

At the same time though you would have lived long enough to learn all their tricks(political or not) and use it against them or to defend your self. maybe you start with a small country and slowly spread your influence. i mean its not like you do't have the time.

i also saw someone write that it would be scary to out live the society you've grown accustomed to

I'm not sure that would be a major problem. My grandmother would sometimes point out that there was only one thing in the room that wasn't invented after she was born, and that was the telephone. And they didn't have one of those until she was a teenager. There were 33,600 people in town, but only 360 had a phone. What are the chances she knew anybody to talk to?

She didn't have trouble adapting to technology.

As a young woman, she drove an electric car (a 1901 Baker), bought a Frigidaire to replace the icebox, and in her later years, wasn't really surprised to see Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin actually walking on the moon.

Of course, there would be a big difference between living thru the changes, and being suddenly transported from 1880 to 1980.

She didn't have trouble adapting

Sociological changes can be pretty drastic over time. Imagine living through the last hundred years if society changed from what it is now to what it was then. I'm pretty sure most wouldn't enjoy it. Some would end up dead through violence.

But all that aside... you need to be at least slightly autistic if not sociopathic for survivor guilt not to destroy someone who lives for hundreds of years.

And imagine being 'homesick' for some past era that modern society has decided was completely backward and wrong. Most people's personalities are decided by their twenties, most beliefs held by one's thirties are almost ingrained. Could someone fake it enough to fit in in a society that's completely opposed to everything they truly believe? Yes, but it would be a daily challenge.

Sociological changes can be pretty drastic over time. Imagine living through the last hundred years if society changed from what it is now to what it was then. I'm pretty sure most wouldn't enjoy it. Some would end up dead through violence.

That falls into the: "Don't it always seem to go, you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone!" category.

Going forward is easier. Before cell phones, we had CB. Before that, Ma Bell. Before that, the Telegraph. Before that, Mail. Pony Express. Letters carried from New York to Californ-i-a by ship.

People coped with the lack of instant communications, because they didn't know there could be a faster alternative.

Going back would be the problem. But it could happen, for various reasons.

That's tech.

Look at politics. Most right-wingers today would be extreme 'progressives' a hundred years ago. Openly out homosexuals? Yeah, if the social changes reversed, how would they ever be able to get back in the closet so they didn't get killed? Black 'community organizers' would find it difficult to become anonymous enough that the KKK wouldn't lynch them. Imagine Bernie Sanders facing the House Un-American Activities Committee.

What I think I often find most sad is that most people have absolutely no idea what the "wings" actually are, or how they have shifted.

That's easy, they are the illusion of choice.

Which is ironic, as that was a Democratic created and run committee.

And? JFK was more Republican than half the Republican candidates since him. Reagan was a Democrat until the left took over the party. Democrats were patriotic, if you go back far enough. They didn't hate the US until the 70s or 80s.

They didn't hate the US until the 70s or 80s.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as unpatriotic anybody who disagrees with you.

Hey, I'm just sharing what's obvious from the outside looking in. Not like I'm from 'murica...

In all fairness, trying to run everyone else off the road seems to be a fairly normal driving pattern for California.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as unpatriotic anybody who disagrees with you.

The counterpoints to that are many.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as racist anybody who disagrees with you.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as bigoted anybody who disagrees with you.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as sexist anybody who disagrees with you.

Isn't it nice to be always able to paint as a denier anybody who disagrees with you.

That list is a long one. I really don't think you want to go there bob.

I really don't think

Eh?

their ideals here haven't changed, the parties themselves have.

Not really... the old Rockefeller Republicans are still around, they just get called RINOs now.
But yeah, the Democrats really changed.

i also saw someone write that it would be scary to out live the society you've grown accustomed to

You don't have to live forever to out live the society you've grown accustomed to.

~Twenty plus years removed from the society is enough. This I know from direct personal experience. The society I left in 79 was not the same ~20 years later. Further, there are other societies I lived and worked in that I later returned to in about the same amount of time. They too changed.

I've never met someone who's lived that long. my parents were born in the 80's and we don't get in contact with my grandmother as musch as i'd like to ask questions. can you give me some key but not as obvious differences from then and now?

That's a long list you're asking for.

My personal circumstances are not common either.

To give you an idea, in 79, cell phones were the toys of the rich. By 99 they were mostly common. Think about the social changes that brought about.

The US in 79 was no where near as PC in 79 as it was in 99. Social dynamics were heavily influenced by that.

In 79, global cooling among scientists was finally giving way to sanity. By 99 it had inverted with the onset of the global warming band wagon.

Music, art, personal interactions, all changed dramatically.

The Soviet Union collapsed around 90, so the society from 79 verses 99 in the US changed. The Russians were no longer the proverbial boogie man. That gave rise to a more subtle boogie man known as terrorism by 99 which peaked by 2001.

When I left there was not a general acceptance of half breeds, yet by 99/2k, if not accepted then it was not given any thought for the most part.

In 79, it was still generally socially acceptable to strive for a blue collar career. By 99 it was becoming a social stain.

As I said, the list is a long one. Above is just a very brief summary. The America I left, with only very brief returns, was not recognizable by me upon settling back into the states.

Those who stay within their given societies don't generally notice the changes. Social creep prevents them from noticing as it's a gradual change to them.

Edited to add:

You very likely have met people who would understand what I'm saying and not recognized them. There are military veterans who've spent the vast majority of their career elsewhere. There are other people like me as well. If you want to learn from the elderly, there are thousands in nursing homes who've been abandoned by their families who would love someone just to talk to. There are thousands of people similar to me who've experienced the same, if not worse sense of feeling like a stranger in the society they once called their own.

the list is a long one

I don't mind. what are some things you like now as aposed to then(i know its kind of a weird thngs as people change and grow but i'm curious) and the other way around

what are some things you like now as aposed to then(i know its kind of a weird thngs as people change and grow but i'm curious) and the other way around

Had to think on this one. The list of changes I like is much shorter than the changes I dislike. I'll keep it to three instances of each.

Likes:

1. Racial acceptance. One of the primary motivators for my leaving to begin with, was the lack of acceptance for my particular racial flavor. Trying to break into established engineering firms was difficult regardless of my education and work history. The good ol' boy network seemed to reserve certain positions for the "right kind of people" which left people like me out in the cold.

By 2k that had mostly faded away. In retrospect, it did turn out in my favor. Those RKOP's usually had no desire to leave US borders. Those same firms had zero problem sending an NA to the more 'dynamic' parts of the world. I personally had no problem going either. The experience gathered in the wilder places was simply not available elsewhere.

2. Information availability. What took hours of painstaking research in a library can now be found in seconds. When I left, verses 2k was a night and day difference.

3. Communications. One of the more critical changes that occurred between 79 and 99 was the antitrust breakup of MA Bell. I don't think the importance of this could be overstated. It directly lead to VoIP and a host of other important advances. All of which lead to being able to stay in touch with the network of people I developed around the globe. Within that network of people were/are several hundred thousands of hours of combined experience. If any one of us had a problem to solve, someone in the rolodex has the solution if there was one to be had. Even though I'm retired, I still participate. Being able to do that without breaking the bank is definitely a plus.

Dislikes:

1. Racial crutches. Anyone born after 1980 or so in the US likely doesn't have a clue what true racism is imo. Between legal and social changes, the premise that someone is being held back due to their race alone is sketchy at best. I know that there are still cases of it, but the current woke mania portraying it as prevalent is in a word, bullshit. It's been my observation that race is being used as a crutch to explain why they are not succeeding.

https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/civil-rights-act-1991

That put some needed teeth into the previous laws, but it's also being abused. If a red, white, brown, yellow, black, etc person applied for a position, the best qualified person should get the position. Instead it's a quota system. In my view, relying on the quota system to get a job rather than working hard and learning is a crutch. Further, the idea that any given race needs such a quota system is racist itself. To accept that crutch is in my view, tacit admission your not qualified enough on the merits to get the job on your own. I beat the previous system on my own. If I could do it, they can as well.

2. Over-sensitive wokeadilles. I was run down by a redneck in his truck for having the temerity to date his white daughter when I was a teen. The resulting damage got me stamped 4-F at MEPS when I later tried to join the military. Those who served in 1973 will understand what getting stamped 4-F for physical ability means for that particular time. That was an adversity to overcome.

The wokeadilles cry and moan over the least little thing. They haven't a clue what true adversity means. They need some perspective, say living and working in a Columbian, Guatemalan, Ghanaian, Philippines, etc village for a year. They should lay off the lattes and grow a pair.

3. Blue collar work is the devil. I paid my way through college via cooning high rise steel, welding vessels, and turning wrenches, with an occasional gig on a pipeline firing line. There are a passel full of pansies out there who in one breath, complain about not being able to get a job with their "studies" degrees, and in the next breath, sniff in disdain at us "knuckle draggers" for daring to suggest they learn a trade. Even after completing my education, getting my P E.'s and a file full of technical certifications, I was still hands on. People that look down on that can kiss my red ass at the brown star. They wouldn't have their office buildings, indoor plumbing, electricity, gas for their cars, much less the car if it weren't for people like me.

Edited for typos

Ehhh, not really.

Yes, really.

If MA Bell still existed, there would be no VoIP available to consumers. Therefore, it did directly lead to it. The resulting competition also lead to better phone rates. You can also be sure MA Bell would have squashed the nascent internet if it could, or at a minimum hampered it. MA Bell was not keen on communications competition.

If MA Bell still existed, there would be no VoIP available to consumers.

MA Bell still exists.

And you are arguing a counterfactual. It's impossible to know what would or would not have happened without the breakup.

BT milked their landline business to subsidise their sport offering.

BT owns a rugby team/league? (I ask, because other than hockey - NHL specifically - football - NFL specifically - MMA/boxing and lacrosse, rugby is the only actual 'sport' that they could be involved with. Yes, if there's no contact, it's a game, not a sport.)

And you are arguing a counterfactual. It's impossible to know what would or would not have happened without the breakup.

Nothing of the sort. As noted by AJ, there are some real world parallels that paint it as a very high probability. A monopoly by definition has no competition to speak of. As a result, they also have no motivation to change their business practices.

One thing I'm not going to do is argue out of context, nor am I going to get buried in the weeds of the particulars.

In context, between 1979 and 1999, there was a massive shift in communications. At the center of that was MA Bell. On the 79 end, it sucked. On the 99 end, it was world's better.

From my perspective, the specifics are irrelevant. I'd disagree on some or your specifics, but again, it's the end result that matters.

For "context" this was the original question ask of me:

what are some things you like now as aposed to then(i know its kind of a weird thngs as people change and grow but i'm curious) and the other way around

I answered that question from my perspective. I was certainly not going to attempt answering the question from anyone else's perspective.

You need to seriously reconsider the stature of the horse you're ridding. One a bit shorter would not make you appear as obtuse.

Those who stay within their given societies don't generally notice the changes. Social creep prevents them from noticing as it's a gradual change to them.

It's the boiling frog problem.

It's the boiling frog problem.

In a nutshell, that's it.

In a nutshell, that's it.

Another example, I've seen a couple of people meet someone who was an adult they knew as kids but haven't seen since and make comments along the lines of "you're shorter than I remember"

No, you were a lot shorter back then.

I don't fear dying, but I do fear being paralyzed

Mine is similar. Years ago, I had by-pass surgery. I woke up from the anesthetic with a breathing tube crammed down my throat. It was the worst experience I've ever encountered, worse than having been wounded while in the service. My fear, right now, is contracting COVID and ending up spending the few days I'd have left with that damned tube down my throat. I think I'd rather they put me out of my misery.

Dying is easy, living is a bitch on steroids. I don't fear dying, but I do fear being paralyzed completely, yet left to exist.

I fully agree with you. Why worry about dying when every day there is a chance you could be killed.

In reality, a lot of casualties of noncombatants. The bartender, the cocktail waitress, the bar back would likely all die, along with most of the customers because they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The Hulk vs any other gamma mutant (except maybe the Leader) as a bar fight and everyone in the bar is dead.

Why? Because the building is coming down.

My grandmother lived long enough to see her oldest child, my mother die.

My father's grandmother buried 3 of her 4 children, none of whom died young. At 108ish she was only in a nursing home for the last 2 or 3 years.

And while nearly blind and somewhat frail, she was not particularly unhealthy.

Born in the 1890s, she only missed the start of the 21st century by a few years.

I'm convinced that the only reason that the only reason she died when she did is that she gave up and more or less willed herself to death before she had to bury the last of her children.

Like you, I can imagine nothing more painful than a parent burying a child, and it doesn't matter if the child died at 10, or 80.