Zompist Bboard Again

The ideal steampunk world would be that in which the point of divergence from our timeline is solely the successful building of the difference engine (which then motivates the building of the analytical engine) but which otherwise is firmly rooted in the Victorian era without bringing modern ideas in aside from those which directly stem from the successful completion of the difference engine and the analytical engine. Thing is, most authors simply can't pull this off.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Mon May 01, 2023 8:34 pm Sociologists use the terms "Flintstoning" and "Jettsoning" to describe the things you all are talking about. I think there can be some value in the superficial "X-punk" genres, where modern ways of living are superimposed over fun aesthetics. This can be good story telling, if you're writing an allegory of modern society. ... For more complex stories, Flintstoning and Jettsoning starts to grate.

I think it's easier to pull this off as comedy / satire than as "serious" storytelling. Transposing elements of modern life to ancient Gaul in the classic Astérix comics was fun; Pratchett's discworld, while having started off as parody of sword-and-sorcery fantasy, developed into an allegory of the modern world set in a fantasy scenario, but was kept fresh by his humour and insights (give or take some of the later books, where exhaustion and probably mental decay start showing their influence).

There's also the difference between readers who just want a good story and don't care too much about logical inconsistencies, and those who take great delight in jumping on the slightest flaw and saying "But if you do *that*, it invalidates the entirety of your setting, and your fiction is therefore devoid of value".

I totally agree, especially when I look at clockwork mecha. mother of god that is silly.

then again, it's easy to discount things as unrealistic when they are indeed possible: not clockwork mecha <or any kind of mecha, for that matter, except *maybe*, *maaaaybe* stuff like battletech, minus the magical energy beams> but i mean, in principle, you could have a a zompist bulleting board running on a bunch of gears. Sure, it'd run slower, but with leaner internet protocols <such as only sending the text of the posts, having something like javascript construct the graphics of the board or something> and some patience on our part, it's not preposterous. Also, globalization on trains <to make it really steam> can also be done, instead of airplanes. or even, I suppose, ekranoplanes instead of airplanes. atomic power could have played a much more important role in our lives than it does, if not for the fossil fuel lobby and whoever else making normies think 'atomic' basically means 'everyone is going to die seven seconds after implementation', and with one ninth the R&D that natural gas powerplants (or fusion) have gotten we could have been running thorium airplanes by 2003 or something.

but yeah, more often than not steampunk -or other such things- are aesthetic: like that scene in league of extraordinary gentlemen where nemo has like a ferrari lmao, all curves and 1980s design principles. basically what if 1997 but things emit water vapor.

alice wrote:[...]and those who take great delight in jumping on the slightest flaw and saying "But if you do *that*, it invalidates the entirety of your setting, and your fiction is therefore devoid of value".

I think the delight comes from the catharsis of expressing a thing what miffs but is nevertheless ubiquitous and everyone acts as if it made sense (because they're not such nerds lmao), rather than an innate "neener neener your setting is silly". after all, these feelings tend to come from people with high interest in fiction etcetera, and they (we) wish the settings made sense.

Torco wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:37 am in principle, you could have a a zompist bulleting board running on a bunch of gears. Sure, it'd run slower, but with leaner internet protocols <such as only sending the text of the posts, having something like javascript construct the graphics of the board or something> and some patience on our part, it's not preposterous. Also, globalization on trains <to make it really steam> can also be done, instead of airplanes. or even, I suppose, ekranoplanes instead of airplanes. atomic power could have played a much more important role in our lives than it does, if not for the fossil fuel lobby and whoever else making normies think 'atomic' basically means 'everyone is going to die seven seconds after implementation', and with one ninth the R&D that natural gas powerplants (or fusion) have gotten we could have been running thorium airplanes by 2003 or something.

IP over Avian Carriers, anyone?

Torco wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:37 am in principle, you could have a a zompist bulleting board running on a bunch of gears. Sure, it'd run slower, but with leaner internet protocols <such as only sending the text of the posts, having something like javascript construct the graphics of the board or something> and some patience on our part, it's not preposterous.

I feel like the first thing to do is check if your idea was already used. And it was; we call the result a "newspaper."

* stories sent by telegraph
* type composed by Linotype (first used in 1886)
* nationwide distribution by trains etc.
* worldwide distribution by submarine cables (Atlantic one completed 1858)

Is that small beer? It was an information revolution. It wasn't much earlier that even simple communications took weeks. Cf. the Battle of New Orleans (Jan. 8, 1815), which famously took place two weeks after the war was ended (Dec. 14, 1814)— though Washington didn't know that either as the treaty was signed in the Netherlands.

Ticker tape displays date back to 1863. Punch cards were used for controlling looms in 1725, and for playing music in the 1880s; the 'modern' 80-character card dates to 1890.

Now figuring out "what they could have done" is an interesting exercise. Displaying data on a board is not an easy problem for Victorian engineering. The CRT wasn't commercially available till 1922. You may think of those flapping signs in train stations, but they are post-World War II. You could do some great things with clockwork, but trying to make a readable display in like 1875 is effectively magic.

The selfie stick was invented about a hundred years after the portable camera.

It took 100 years to attach a stick.

Remember this every time you wonder why the Victorians didn't have the internet. There is a social side to the development of every technology, as well as economic and cultural preconditions.

Oh, surely this here board has more functionality than a newspaper, old chap.

What Moose said, yeah. Also, it's not that difficult, if you're willing to forego the fancy graphics purely mechanical displays aren't impossible. using such things, one can, for instance, send and receive text over vast distances. For even cheaper solutions, I suppose you could also have an internet that runs on morse! the switching could be handled, after all, by a rudimentary computer, so as to provide a layer of abstraction between the workings of the network and the user, who might as well type into a keyboard that itself does the 'bibi biiii bi bibi bi bi biiii bi' into a wire, which gets decoded on the other side. so you'd type, I don't know, "command: show list of threads" and then, you know, things happen levers pull, wires go live and dead in a certain sequence, hopefully fast, and then you hear

a lot of beeps wrote:- .... .-. . .- -.. ... -... -. .--. ---... / - .... . / ... .--. . -.-. ..- .-.. .- - .. ...- . / ..-. .. -.-. - .. --- -. / - .... .-. . .- -.. --..-- / ..--- ..... / -- .. -. ..- - . ... / .- --. --- --..-- / -... -.-- / --.. --- -- .--. .. ... -

and you know zompist made a post 25 minutes ago in the fantasy thread.

I don't know precisely how fast a human can decode morse, but google says listening to up to 70 wpm is viable: that even permits chatting, playing chess or checkers online, even trade stocks, between trusted partners such as brokers. Not playing world of warcraft, though, admittedly.

Fantasy in video games

Hades
Basically a family drama with heres cool fantasy bits which are more integrated into gameplay than anything. It's however very well written. I've also played transistor for a few moments and as far as i can tell it just sucks in terms of gameplay (or maybe i'm not interested) and the writing here also sucks. Also the artstyle kinda sucks. I like the gorgon head.

Cult of the Lamb
What if we made cults but funny and also real. This game thinks cleaning up poop is cool and its not half bad but it is then again ultimately shallow.

League of Legends
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH we have everything fantasy world coming in. The actual gameplay blurbs when you play a character are sometimes good see lux and morgana (and yasuo i've been playing him lately) but the setting is pretty kitchen sinky

Oneshot
Here we go guys now this is the peak of video game writing right here every aspect of this world is loaded with the famed MYSTIQUE to the point looking at food is worth it. You solve puzzles get lore blurbs about robots, prophets and people's daily lives as well as the tale of a child thrust into an unforgiving world. Very deep in its execution and only a few hours of play. I will write more about this when i finish the game for the third time (i haven't played solstice).

Torco wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:54 pm Oh, surely this here board has more functionality than a newspaper, old chap.

Does it? I understand being in love with 1990s technology, some of it was good, it really sucked in the caveman era, trying to play Donkey Kong on a typewriter. But I think dismissing 1880s technology is pretty blinkered. Wouldn't you be at least a little embarrassed to maintain that the music played in your teenage years was, like, the best in the history of the world? But you cheerfully do the same with 1990s social media.

The speed, global reach, and information density of a newspaper is pretty amazing, it helped create the modern world, and it was not as centralized and problematic as modern mass media.

using such things, one can, for instance, send and receive text over vast distances. For even cheaper solutions, I suppose you could also have an internet that runs on morse! the switching could be handled, after all, by a rudimentary computer, so as to provide a layer of abstraction between the workings of the network and the user, who might as well type into a keyboard that itself does the 'bibi biiii bi bibi bi bi biiii bi' into a wire, which gets decoded on the other side. so you'd type, I don't know, "command: show list of threads" and then, you know, things happen levers pull, wires go live and dead in a certain sequence, hopefully fast, and then you hear

a lot of beeps wrote:- .... .-. . .- -.. ... -... -. .--. ---... / - .... . / ... .--. . -.-. ..- .-.. .- - .. ...- . / ..-. .. -.-. - .. --- -. / - .... .-. . .- -.. --..-- / ..--- ..... / -- .. -. ..- - . ... / .- --. --- --..-- / -... -.-- / --.. --- -- .--. .. ... -

and you know zompist made a post 25 minutes ago in the fantasy thread.

You've almost figured out how 1800s tech was actually used. Hint: the Victorians were not complete slabs of lard, they figured out how to use their tech very effectively.

Remember, the teletype was invented very early. The reason technicians reading morse code persisted was because it wasn't broke. They could have switched to entirely teletype if the messages were sent and received by ordinary people, but they weren't. The system of using technicians worked fine. That's partly a reflection of how labour worked in Victorian times, and also how much people weren't intent on bringing these technologies into the home. Again, the question isn't why didn't they invent the internet, but why would they want to?

Closer to the present, I've got the impression that people in various specialized professions - cops and spooks, for instance, but also people working in retail in shops where you could order things - had things that were kind of like a simple specialized internet a few years before The Internet became a thing for most people.

Imagine what would have happened if the Victorians had worked out how to use the telegraph to transmit porn. That would have been the major paradigm shift.

Yeah. That didn't happen until three years after Queen Victoria died.

alice wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 2:56 am Imagine what would have happened if the Victorians had worked out how to use the telegraph to transmit porn. That would have been the major paradigm shift.

Does it? I understand being in love with 1990s technology, some of it was good, it really sucked in the caveman era, trying to play Donkey Kong on a typewriter. But I think dismissing 1880s technology is pretty blinkered. Wouldn't you be at least a little embarrassed to maintain that the music played in your teenage years was, like, the best in the history of the world? But you cheerfully do the same with 1990s social media.

The speed, global reach, and information density of a newspaper is pretty amazing, it helped create the modern world, and it was not as centralized and problematic as modern mass media.

Oh, don't get me wrong, instagram has more functionality than this here board as well, I'm not fanboying php boards, merely saying that you could run one on levers, wires and so on, and that the resulting system would be categorically different from a newspaper.

Of course, a network of babbage machines in 1882 would not, in fact, be used to run a bulletin board about some nerdy interest or other, not at first anyway: but it *could* be used for things newspapers can't, such as calculating and distributing artillery firing solutions for multiple batteries (they had access to guns with several kilomters range), or helping out with the accounting. I don't know how you'd make a spreadsheet on a babbage tho.

how do you figure that newspapers are *less* centralized than social media, btw? at least with social media, you can publish stuff without being employed by the newspaper owner. then again, there were a lot more newspapers back in the day than there are social media sites now.

You've almost figured out how 1800s tech was actually used. Hint: the Victorians were not complete slabs of lard, they figured out how to use their tech very effectively.

no one's saying they were bricks of butter... hell, they basically conquered the world: indeed the whole point is that they would have been clever enough to make use of babbages plus telegraph wires, but they didn't use mechanical computers, such that they couldn't have figured out how to network them through teletype or telegraph or whatever. therefore, they can't have had a computer to which you remotely feed the instruction "show me the list of threads" which could answer "bip bip bibiiibip" or whatever. this leibnitz-like "what was done in 1873 was the best or only possible employment of 1873 technology" seems to me quite odd. The greeks knew about steam engines, and could have developped and use them, but didn't for a variety of reasons, probably some accidental, some social, and more. The ancient peruvians knew about the wheel, they had toys with wheels, but did not employ it for moving loads, again for a variety of reasons (geographical and zoological amongst them). technology is not the only determinant of technology, and even if it was, if you stipulate a technology which the victorians didn't in fact have (but, at least in principle, could have), wouldn't that change the way they would have used the rest of their tech?

Again, the question isn't why didn't they invent the internet, but why would they want to?

yeah, this is a stronger challenge to the notion of a clockwork-and-telegraph internet. who and what would it be for. then again, stipulating a working babbage machine being completed and used for at least some things, it seems likely operators would, between then and ENIAC, find some use for their babbages to communicate.

One thing this thread got me thinking about: suppose a modern person who is reasonably intelligent but isn’t an expert (perhaps they majored in English instead of Comp Sci in college or whatever) is suddenly plummeted into the 1850s with no time to prepare? Supposing everyone believes this person is from the future, I’d be curious how rapidly the Victorians could start advancing technological advances just by being given a layman’s description of airplanes, computers, etc, with only the layman’s ability to describe how they work? Take a Connecticut Yankee but without the engineering background that the character in Twain’s book had.

Not taking any particular position on what the result would be, just feel like it would be a fun scenario (and not exactly original since I mention Connecticut Yankees…)

Torco wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:53 am The greeks knew about steam engines, and could have developped and use them, but didn't for a variety of reasons, probably some accidental, some social, and more.

This is actually a very interesting case. The short version is that the original Greek design was completely useless for any sort of practical situation; it needed ridiculous amounts of fuel and water to keep on going. And it remained useless until someone happened to find a situation where ridiculous amounts of fuel and water were available, but repetitive motion was needed — which only happened when Britain started to develop coal mines. It was only then that there was any incentive to improve steam engines — which continued until they become efficient enough to be used in textile manufacturing, which gave us the Industrial Evolution. (But give the whole article a read; it’s very interesting.)

I suppose a similar logic applies to the Internet, actually. Telegraphs could have been extended to form a proto-Internet… but it wouldn’t have been practical: Morse code is slow and you need lots of training to be able to use it well enough to operate a telegraph fluently. (You can find videos of operators inputting Morse code at amazing speeds.) All in all, telegraphy just couldn’t compete with books, magazines, lectures, correspondence courses and other information-sharing devices of the Victorian era. Instead, the Internet had to wait until someone decided they had a need to connect lots of devices together in a large network — which only happened when the US made ARPANET to be nuke-resistant. Of course, once that was working people realised there were all kinds of other uses for a big network of smart devices, but that initial step had to happen first.

Civil War Bugle wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 9:25 amOne thing this thread got me thinking about: suppose a modern person who is reasonably intelligent but isn’t an expert (perhaps they majored in English instead of Comp Sci in college or whatever) is suddenly plummeted into the 1850s with no time to prepare? Supposing everyone believes this person is from the future, I’d be curious how rapidly the Victorians could start advancing technological advances just by being given a layman’s description of airplanes, computers, etc, with only the layman’s ability to describe how they work? Take a Connecticut Yankee but without the engineering background that the character in Twain’s book had.

Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXy3uII-xn0

France had something called the Minitel -- you can look up for the details, but basically it was a modem plus a computer terminal; nothing to fancy, but these things were in almost every home in the 80s. They were used quite a bit -- the real money maker was chat sex.
I gather the US had something similar going on with BBSs.
It was cutting-edge tech but didn't take off like the Internet did, basically because communications were expensive.

The major factor is economics. You could imagine a Victorian internet running on difference engines... but it would have been quite expensive. As opposed to the comparatively cheap PCs and Internet in the 90s, and of course these days computing power and bandwidth are essentially free.

For a Victorian Internet you'd have to figure out how they would have brought down the costs.

bradrn wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 9:26 am

Torco wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:53 am The greeks knew about steam engines, and could have developped and use them, but didn't for a variety of reasons, probably some accidental, some social, and more.

This is actually a very interesting case. The short version is that the original Greek design was completely useless for any sort of practical situation; it needed ridiculous amounts of fuel and water to keep on going. And it remained useless until someone happened to find a situation where ridiculous amounts of fuel and water were available, but repetitive motion was needed — which only happened when Britain started to develop coal mines. It was only then that there was any incentive to improve steam engines — which continued until they become efficient enough to be used in textile manufacturing, which gave us the Industrial Evolution. (But give the whole article a read; it’s very interesting.)

And then there are the improvements in precision mechanics that happened during medieval and early modern times - I guess those were as important for the industrial revolution as the steam engine itself.