What's new
By:

SciFi Discussion Lobby

I've read the book several times and enjoy watching the film every few years. I have it and 2010 on DVD. I also notice 2001 is available in HD in iTunes. Think I will rent it this weekend.

I've always believed human evolution was "helped" along and Clarke's telling of how it might have happened truly bends the mind.
It's a story for all-times.

The recent "intervention" treatment we saw in the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica was quite breathtaking too - for television at least. The blend of science and spirituality was gripping stuff. But now I'm obsessing. Again. ;)

AA

Sent from my iPhone using iPF
 
Just in case you guys missed it, 2001 had iPads in the movie. ;)


Remember the scene when Discovery had just left orbit, and Poole and Bowman were sitting at a table, eating? Remember that they were watching a news broadcast about them... On tablets laying on the table.

Clarke was a visionary. I loved reading 2001, 2010 and 2061.
 
MemphisMark said:
Just in case you guys missed it, 2001 had iPads in the movie. ;)

Remember the scene when Discovery had just left orbit, and Poole and Bowman were sitting at a table, eating? Remember that they were watching a news broadcast about them... On tablets laying on the table.

Clarke was a visionary. I loved reading 2001, 2010 and 2061.
Click to expand...

Nope. Didn't miss it. Bowman even moves his, so you can see its wireless. In the book, it was called the Newspad, and was used by Heywood Floyd. It was limited to the entire world's newspapers, and was constantly updated. Here's the relevant quote from 2001.

Arthur C Clarke said:
Floyd sometimes wondered if the Newspad, and the fantastic technology behind it, was the last word in man’s quest for perfect communications. Here he was, far out in space, speeding away from Earth at thousands of miles an hour, yet in a few milliseconds he could see the headlines of any newspaper he pleased. (That very word “newspaper,” of course, was an anachronistic hangover into the age of electronics.) The text was updated automatically on every hour; even if one read only the English versions, one could spend an entire lifetime doing nothing but absorbing the ever-changing flow of information from the news satellites.”

Excerpt From: Arthur C. Clarke. “2001: A Space Odyssey."
Click to expand...


Now here's the interesting bit. As far as I'm aware, Clarke never predicted anything quite like the Internet. His Newspad was quite limited in scope, judged by the standards of 2013, although, of course, it would have been fantastic in 1968. He still saw the dissemination of information as being inevitably controlled by the newspaper companies, yet when I hit Return, on my magical piece of glass in a couple of minutes, you will be able to read my words wherever you are on the planet.

To quote ACC again, this time from 3001, what we find commonplace today would have been "technology indistinguishable from magic" in 1968.

I knew I could find it eventually. I wrote this as a reply when I first joined iPF.

KevinJS said:
Scanning my memory, I recall some of the leaps in technology over the years, from computer systems that filled a room, to the initial boom in home computing of the early '80s. It seems to me that only now have we acquired something, in the iPad, that is truly life-changing. Where once we had to either wait for a convenient moment, or note a thought for later action, all one has to do now is reach for the iPad and transform thought into action.

Incidentally, to answer the "Who would have imagined..." question, I can tell you who. Arthur C. Clarke pretty well invented the concept of the iPad in his 1968 book "2001-A Space Odyssey". His version was limited to replacing newsprint, and was in fact called the NewsPad, but obviously involved some sort of wireless capability for updating itself, since he referred to the "ever-changing headlines". He also introduced the concept of the touch screen. The user of the NewsPad would touch a headline on the device, which would then expand to fill the screen with the body of the article. The film version of 2001 went a step further and had the actors watching television broadcasts on their wireless devices. Truly visionary.

What else would we really expect from the father of Hal9000?

Sent from my iPad using iPF
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Some of the winners of the 2012 Hugo Awards, given at Chicon 7, last year.

image-3438723787.webp.

image-3338402819.webp



image-753564078.webpThe complete list of the winners of the 2012 Hugo Awards.
 
I just finished watching this. This is the rare original teaser trailer for Star Wars episode VI, Revenge of the Jedi.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J. A. said:
The next ingenious bad guy, it seems. :-)
I hope the movie is as good as it's trailer. I've been waiting for it since I knew it's going to come out in May.
Click to expand...

I think you're right about "new" bad guy.
There's been considerable speculation that it's a previous series bad guy with critical changes due to the time line shift that occurred in the previous Star Trek movie reboot.

But this adversary doesn't seem to be Khan, Gary Mitchell, Gary 7 or Q.

AA

Sent from my iPad using iPF
 
AdmiralAdama said:
I think you're right about "new" bad guy.
There's been considerable speculation that it's a previous series bad guy with critical changes due to the time line shift that occurred in the previous Star Trek movie reboot.

But this adversary doesn't seem to be Khan, Gary Mitchell, Gary 7 or Q.

AA

Sent from my iPad using iPF
Click to expand...

I'm not really considering Q to be bad.
 
J. A. said:
I'm not really considering Q to be bad.
Click to expand...

Well outrageously misguided then. ;). But remember because of the time rift created in the last movie - Q could be something completely different. Khan could be a school teacher. Which is why Janeway hated a paradox. ;)

AA

Sent from my iPad using iPF
 
Last edited:
Oh, this date has so been entered in my calendar!

Once I understood the "new" Star Trek was a reboot (using/with the alternate timeline) - I loved the first one. This next one looks to be entertaining, also.

Marilyn
 
AdmiralAdama said:
Well outrageously misguided then. ;). But remember because of the time rift created in the last movie - Q could be something completely different. Khan could be a school teacher. Which is why Janeway hated a paradox. ;)

AA

Sent from my iPad using iPF
Click to expand...

You could be right.
I was thinking of John deLancie's Q. I may be misguided, as you suppose, but I found him quite amusing. Well, most of the time. :-)
 
J. A. said:
You could be right.
I was thinking of John deLancie's Q. I may be misguided, as you suppose, but I found him quite amusing. Well, most of the time. :-)
Click to expand...

I meant "Q" was misguided, not you. He's probably more scoundrel than villain.
Although fatalities were involved in some "Q" encounters.

AA

Sent from my iPhone using iPF
 
AdmiralAdama said:
I meant "Q" was misguided, not you. He's probably more scoundrel than villain.
Although fatalities were involved in some "Q" encounters.

AA

Sent from my iPhone using iPF
Click to expand...

Sorry, I obviously misunderstood you first.

In this aspect I have to agree.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Most reactions

Similar threads

S
NARR8 [is a unique new channel for entertaining]
Replies
0
Views
3K
Scorpion888
S

Latest posts

Back
Top