“The analyzer contained just short of a million vacuum tubes…” They conducted interstellar war with less onboard processing power than an iPhone 6.

@genechanloui

2 ай бұрын

It's so crazy how some authors predicted super small computers and others couldn't think past current technology

@jancerny8109

2 ай бұрын

@@genechanloui Writers take the imaginative leaps that power their stories, and keep the flaws that allow them to teach their lessons. The actual events of the future have no obligation to confirm or refute their postulates.

Every A.C. Clarke novel is a gem. We need another genius sci-fi writer like him!

@beverlywhitman303

Жыл бұрын

Isaac asimov, David weber, John Ringo, there are others i just can't recall the names of atm but i've enjoyed many story's from those 3 more than any of clarks works.

@ajobdunwell2585

Жыл бұрын

David Weber is garbage. Neil Stephenson, the polity books(can't remember the author), even the earthcore books, sigler I think are good... Kloos, pkd, Niven. Scifi has been going down hill the last lil bit, but if you keep an eye on scifi mags you'll find some good stuff.

@ajobdunwell2585

Жыл бұрын

Oh, check out Starshatter.. by my friend Aragmar.

@beverlywhitman303

Жыл бұрын

@@ajobdunwell2585 yea its weird how some people hate david webers stuff, he's only sold 8 million books to Neil Stephenson 3 mill so it's not a view held by many luckily.

@ajobdunwell2585

Жыл бұрын

@@beverlywhitman303 George RR Martin sells more books than both of them combined, therefore he is the better author.

If something isn’t broken and still works as intended….don’t focus all your efforts and energy into trying to fix it or make it better. Truly groundbreaking innovation can’t be rushed and put into action on a large scale until it’s been properly tested, and with plenty of the older tech on standby just in case things don’t work as intended outside the laboratory.

@eastlynburkholder3559

Жыл бұрын

The law of diminishing returns says that improvement will cost more as you are trying for higher and higher efficiency or effectiveness or cost effectiveness or yield. To just get it to work might take thus much to get a 10% improvement might cost almost as much, to get the ever smaller inprovements as you get closer to 100% takes ever greater effort and resources in a geometric rather than arithmetic increase, 1 2 4 8 16 32 rather than 1 2 3 4 5 6.

@LetsConquerTheUniverseTogether

Жыл бұрын

Just because something is working as intended doesn't mean it is working in the best interest of society.

Arthur C Clarke (author) was quite familiar with 'technology' as he was credited with good efforts in the new tech of RADAR (RAdio Detection And Ranging) during WW2 in Britain. Yet, as has become common folklore, the Germans kept spawning advanced technology of their own that was a 'step ahead' of what the Allies were deploying. Yet the Allies WON, by overwhelming the 'quality' of Germany with the 'quantity' of the Allied Production! This was the background of this 1951 short story by Sir Arthur C Clarke CBE (1989) and keeps this story eternally fresh!

@tacticalturtlez4906

2 жыл бұрын

Actually by the end of the war, the allies were as technologically advanced as the axis, the issue was production. As the US kept pushing, the Germans would encounter late versions of the Sherman’s with better armor, ammo, and guns. Meanwhile, Germany had less resources and could only build worse quality units. It also doesn’t help when Germany focused on hard factors not necessarily realizing that the soft factors also mattered.

@martiedoherty5765

Жыл бұрын

Very true. A good example is the Soviet ,"crude" but sturdy and easy to make in huge numbers, T-34 tank vs the superior, but fewer produced Panther and Tiger tanks of the Germans. Half as good is fine if you send 10 tanks against 1.

@eastlynburkholder3559

Жыл бұрын

@@martiedoherty5765 in Africa, it was decided to produce more medical staff thst were like paramedics or first aid taught persons. They were taught to identify common illnesses and to refer to specialists the other cases. Having more blunt instruments rather than scapels, as far as staff, was more effective for that country. I was once told by a restaurant manager that he would like to ride in the space ship I helped to design and build... [ but he wanted my actions and routines to be more slap dash and have less safety measures and back ups and I was driving him crazy at times]. However, we rarely ran dead out of things without warning and such when I was around.

@gtgodbear6320

Жыл бұрын

A lot of his ideas that were in books is technology today. Like tablets with Wi-Fi .

@Wally-pu2hh

8 ай бұрын

Except in Antarctica operation high jump , after the war the German outpost defeated the US navy led by admiral Byrd

Wonderful read. You have a gift my friend. Cheers 🍻

excellent narration. It is an art, e.g. Richard Burton and sparse others.

I always loved how unexpected and petty (but understandable) the ending of this story is.

@mosjeffinately7822

Жыл бұрын

Could you explain? I thought that scientist killed themself. How is he sharing a cell with him.

@HansLemurson

Жыл бұрын

@@mosjeffinately7822 No, they were both being held prisoner after defeat in the war. He was the "late" Chief of the Research Staff, because that position no longer exists. Read "late" as "former" here. But if the narrator has to share a cell with Professor Norden...the professor might end up "late" in the more deadly sense.

Norden is an interesting choice of name for the scientist - it is likely a reference to the American Norden Bombsight of WWII, an expensive and complex bombsight that delivered remarkably accurate bombing in pre-war testing. The US Army Air Force built it's daylight precision bombing doctrine and plan for defeating Germany and Japan from the air around the Norden, but real world results were disappointing. Strong wind, clouds, and enemy defenses made American bombing about as inaccurate as anybody else, and bombers were mauled by fighters and flak in daylight. USAAF eventually settled for carpet bombing cities, the effectiveness of which is contentious. But the US could do both high technology and mass production, unlike the story, so the misstep didn't cost them the war. There are many other WWII parallels, (B-29, V2, various German super tanks, etc) but I think the Norden reference was very deliberate.

@RuledByMars

2 жыл бұрын

Keen insight! I've visited Norden with my dad decades ago. He did business with them there's a sight under glass in the lobby :) I've read many USAAF guys say it was very highly overrated. Either way, knowing they had it was at least surely good for morale. Cheers from Daytona Beach

@NevilleRollerDrome

Жыл бұрын

One of my professors in college trained airmen how to use the Norden bomb site during WWII

@carolheward6479

Жыл бұрын

Thats an interesting point. I knew the bombsight you mean had issues and the english air force just bombed areas where as the us air force were going for accuracy which is more efficient. It took time to develop and caused issue like you mentioned but there is also an issue of morality. Alteast trying to make bombing militarily more effective meant less innocent casualties where as the english never put in the effort to do this. The us bombsight eventually worked and lead to better sights and so it was worth it but even if it had failed atleast they would have made the effort to hit military targets and not bomb cities like they ended up doing they tried atleast.

love your reading. it’s really good and your voice and style are so calming. please record much more. thanks much 😊🌷🌱

In war don't take the old systems out of production until the replacements are proven better.

That was awesome! Thank you!

Excellent narration!! I just found the second best narrator of sci fi short stories. U made it feel like 3d in my brain. I hope I find more stories read by u, and i also hope u open up a podcast. There's many out there lacking the mojo u poses to read and tell a story. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

This was a great short story.

I love reading old scifi and seeing how the technology of the time the story was written effects the "advanced version of the technology". I read a series off stories from the 1920s or so and the tech employed was all based on a sort of vinyl record reading computers just like this one uses valve tubes so our scifi uses microchips what's going to be the technology that is used in the 2300 scifi?

@eastlynburkholder3559

Жыл бұрын

Future readers will mock or be baffled by our silicon microchips; I believe, they will be using biological grown things. The grown rather than built items will seem like magic spells or potions. The blue print the organism uses will be like an incantation.

Author C Clarke was an early advocate of the geo synchronous satellites. He said we would have the Dick Tracy watch technology, almost every one, not exactly his words.

I like short sci fi stories! Thank you!

Splendid, keep up the good work!

You have a great reading voice. I am looking forward to more.

I don't think I knew this story, surprisingly. It is an excellent one though! Thank you for it!

Thank you. Stay safe out there & best wishes from Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🙏 ♥

My favourite story. Am in the midst of writing a script based on this.

Excellent work!

Thank you for share this little jewels!

Great reading of a great story. HFY

@jamesprocella

2 жыл бұрын

Many thanks!

Nice book upload more like this.

This brings back memories of my youth :)

Thank You for the reading

As a SW R&D manager I feel reminded of cases were „non functional requirements“ were forgotten - like usability, reliability, maintainability, sustainability, … because everybody just thinks about the great new function/feature.

Thanks for this

You have a real good audiobook reading voice, you should be doing Audible.

It was great.

Nice voice good narration

Great reading! Only an Englishman can voice Clarke.

“Quantity has a quality all its own.” Attributed to Joseph Stalin, but this seems to be disputed.

Good story and well read Point of truth ... This was the Vietnam War problem ... The fancy equipment we had and we lost against a practically barefoot enemy They had passion and they were fighting on home territory We had fancy equipment but our heart was not in it and I do believe our brave men had doubt in their heart and were thinking "Why are we here?" (Same scenario back in 1700's when we were the barefoot fighters and the British were the immensely strong, well supplied enemy)

@Wally-pu2hh

8 ай бұрын

We dis not defeat the British we are still under their control but the illusion of freedom sort of still exists

@summersolstice884

8 ай бұрын

@@Wally-pu2hh Interesting point ... In 1700's the people understood the concept of King & Country ... This going back to the Sumerians .. .Hard to break a mind set that we are brought up into ... (Ex Many people would be upset if you tell them they do not own their home and land ... Don't pay your taxes and see how fast the "owner" swoops to lay claim to it )

The way Clarke describes the war , it’s more like the narrator is describing the war as a German officer in WW2 describing how Germany lost the war. They had better weapons but their enemy had more. How they lost all the gains they had made like the Germans did to Russia and America/Britain. That they wasted so much time and energy trying to invent wonder weapons when they should have made simpler weapons that they were overwhelmed by greater numbers that they were constantly scrutinized in their cells, I think Clarke is talking about the arrogance of Nazi Germany. Their sense of ‘SUPERIORITY’ to everyone around them. I don’t think he would choose the name of a hero to represent Nazi Science. Just my opinion.

I command the 4 of the girls to reveal to themselves my aesthetic sense and sensibilities, when it comes to women and my sexual wants, desires and styles. They are to clearly match them to their own. They are also to Extract every permutation and combination of aesthetic and sexual pleasures through seismographic charts and vividly realised images and sounds.

Hell is other people!

Warhammer 40k awaiting patiently with 100k subs.

You could definitely work with warhammer40k audiobooks you have the voice of a commander or something similar like that I just love your voice

@jamesprocella

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for listening- and what a cool idea I love it

That's a serious case of it sucks to be him.

Yeah it might not be a good idea two put them to in the same cell.

You had 666 subscriptions and, since that seemed somewhat diabolical, I subbed so as to remove the brimstone.

@jamesprocella

Жыл бұрын

Indeed that wouldn’t do! I appreciate this, thank you for listening.

Someone send this to Washington!!!! QUICK!!!!

@tacticalturtlez4906

2 жыл бұрын

Why?

any time someone tells you all your old weapons will be obsolete with this new thing you tell them to f off and stuff it, they can get a couple test designs but the entire force isnt switching to something new until a year of testing in the field. missiles were said to render guns pointless in planes, nukes were to render invasions/armies meaningless, and if you go back far enough you will probably find a general or someone telling a king the bow will render melee useless. never, for any reason, change the entire way you do things without testing things outside of a lab / secure environment. the amount of times coding worked perfectly in testing but went belly up when made public is infuriating and this is an issue that stretches into basically all fields.

@Eris123451

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed; after all why waste time banging flints together when hitting things with rocks works perfectly well ?

@scp2539

2 жыл бұрын

@@Eris123451 technically, all or our weapons have just been improving how well/fast we hit someone with a rock XD

@Eris123451

2 жыл бұрын

@@scp2539 Well yes, there is that of course.

Vacuum tubes? In a future of interstellar war?

@auronoxe

Жыл бұрын

The story was written before even the single transistor was invented. ACC was not the type of writer to fantasize about things like “duotronic” or “isolinear chips” like in StarTrek. ;-) At least not in his early years.

nearly a million valves and 500 staff. wow

Zumwalt destroyer anyone? 😂🙄

@Aeolusdallas

2 жыл бұрын

That a single testbed. Not the entire fleet

Norrin radd was a funny scientist allso

@timhenley3602

Жыл бұрын

I'm something of a scientist myself...

Hitler’s wonder weapons and super tanks

Consider the U.S in Afghanistan, the most technically advanced military on the planet and we spent 20 years fighting cave dwellers to a stalemate. All the Taliban needed do was keep us from winning.

Norden was the wrong choice for their lead scientist

I command everyone to take medication. Just do it.

I command that Jenk gets access to the destroyer of Jews bit that I did in my mind.

ACClarke genius 🤘🇦🇺🌌

I'm guessing that Elon Musk doesn't know about this story.

I command all of you to stop reading my mind.

The late? So he killed the professor?

@jamesprocella

Жыл бұрын

In this case it just means he is no longer in his job anymore

@TheKielbasaKid

Жыл бұрын

Shows how young I was when I read this classic story. Missing the apparent fact that the deposed leader had permanently dealt with Professor Norden. Thanks for the upload.

This story classically illlustrates the bad application of S-curve innovation theory. Each main technology follows the curve of diminishing returns, which is an S-curve (resources on the x-axis, performance on the y-axis). Ttherefore at some time has to be replaced by the next technology that has a higher S-curve. The time of development of next main technology to start is when the current technology is at its steepest in the curve, not near its peak value. So, halfway the curve, when the current technology is at its most efficient, not when it approaches the curve's end, at its most effective. This might be counterintuitive to some. The time to transfer to and implement the next technology is when the current technology approaches its peak or when the next technology is halfway its own curve. Which is also the time to start developing the next-thereafter technology. Which may also seem counterintuitive. And so on. What went wrong for the military power in the story is that they were caught at the always vulnerable point of transfer to their next technology. Their new technology wasn't at the halfway point yet, iow not yet most efficient, their current technology was already at its peak performance and they hadn't started the then-next, even better technology. So they had the worst of all worlds. Their technology may have been superior, but their innovation management clearly was abominable. The narrating character might think that his defense is that they lost due to their technological superiority, but he clearly describes their culpability in how they failed to apply superior tech into superior power. He testified against himself.

My harsh opinion: complete fault of Army. No matter what Scientists invent, who disbands all established protocols and go gung ho on something 100% untested in real life. In reality, I don't think it ever happens.

👾🫀👾

The irony here is that the problem isn't Norden, it's his predecessor. The sort of people who would have us keep the oldest planes and ignore new technologies, such that eventually theoretical technology's jump is too far ahead for logistics to handle. His predecessor should have even handedly integrated new technology over time. This would've helped avoid overly enthusiastic adoption. See Russia's problems in Ukraine caused by too much "the good old weapons will always be best"

Norden was exactly like Fauci.

How can an audiobook be 28 minutes long . That's not even a short story .

@auronoxe

Жыл бұрын

What a strange comment. A short story usually has not more than 4000 words. At 150 words per minute (typical speed in US) this takes 27 minutes! 😂 Fits perfectly.