Lake of the Lake: Why Did Adam Roberts Opt for Utopia Over Dystopia in His Novel?

Two spacecraft explore the black hole, highlighted in Adam Roberts’ novel.

Science Photo Library / Alamy Stock Photo

The foundation of this novel stemmed from my desire to craft utopian fiction, a first for me, as my earlier works primarily revolved around traditional science fiction. The concept of utopia—portraying an improved or ideal world—predates science fiction itself, famously introduced by Thomas More in his 1516 work, Utopia.

Intrigued by the evolution of this genre, I noted that More’s Utopia inspired numerous copies. Over the subsequent 17th and 18th centuries, a multitude of utopian literature emerged. It flourished in the 19th century and continued into the 20th with notable works like Samuel Butler’s Erewhon (1872), William Morris’s News from Nowhere (1892), H.G. Wells’s A Modern Utopia (1905), and B.F. Skinner’s Walden Two (1948). Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (1888) stands out as a significant American bestseller, catalyzing the establishment of numerous “Bellamy Clubs” and a nationalist movement aimed at realizing his vision of utopia.

But what about our contemporary landscape? Utopian narratives seem largely relegated, replaced by an overwhelming prevalence of dystopian themes—the dark antithesis. Think of titles like The Hunger Games, Road, Divergent, and The Maze Runner, alongside numerous cyberpunk realms, Battle Royale, and Oryx and Crake. This raises an intriguing question: why has utopia fallen out of favor while dystopia thrives?

One potential explanation is that utopia inherently lacks conflict. When aspiring writers present their imaginative worlds, I often query, “Where’s the conflict?” Without conflict, there’s no drama or narrative. Crafting a perfect utopia is challenging because, by its nature, a flawless realm might lack the tension necessary for storytelling. I’ve often contended that no one truly writes a utopia, to which some might counter with Iain M. Banks’s Culture series as an example. Yet, Banks seldom delves into the euphoria of cultural existence, focusing instead on the dangers surrounding its covert agencies. In my own narrative, the characters are extricated from their utopian comforts, thrust into peril, monstrosities, and adventure.

However, I aspired to delve deeper and scrutinize the very essence of utopia itself. Is the ideal world even attainable? “Can we make the world a little better?”—this is certainly achievable, but can we fully reorganize society to achieve a flawless utopia?

Some years back, I was invited to deliver a keynote address at the Utopialess Conference, an annual event across Europe. During my visit to Tarragona, Spain, I presented my ideas, which can be summarized as follows: Utopia, as a concept, cannot elude the nuances of human nature. Some utopias manifest in authoritarian structures (as seen in More’s original vision), where the authority must reconcile power with utopian ideals. Conversely, others are grassroots endeavors, suggesting that with the removal of material or psychological ailments, humanity can coexist blissfully. I must express my skepticism; as literary critic John Carrey posits, all utopias share a fundamental desire to sanitize reality, simplifying the existence of actual human beings.

In my Utopial speech, I proposed that the most compelling representation of utopia in modern culture is a television series: Teletubbies. These entities—whether genetically modified posthumans, or simply whimsical beings—embody utopian principles, existing in a bubble of childlike simplicity where their needs are easily met, leading to constant joy. Yet, it’s unlikely that adults would perceive Teletubbyland as desirable. This suggests that the concept of utopia is somewhat infantilized. Following my lecture, I mingled at the reception, engaging with attendees. Some were dismissive and turned away when approached, a reaction clarified later by organizers. The conference attracted both literary scholars and true Utopians—those genuinely seeking to realize their visions. They felt I was mocking their aspirations.

I regret they felt insulted, but I stand by my interpretations in Lake of Darkness, where I intertwine social theory, imaginative technological elements, and distinct characters to explore utopian ideals.

Adam Roberts’ Lake of Darkness (Gollancz) is the latest selection for the New Scientist Book Club. Join us and read together here.

Topics:

  • science fiction/
  • New Scientist Book Club

Source: www.newscientist.com

Is Your Data Safe from AI Giants? Not unless you opt out | Chris Stokel Walker

IImagine someone driving a high-end sports car to a pub. £1.5 million Koenigsegg Regerapark and saunter out of your car to pick one at random. They come to the pub where you’re drinking, start walking around the patrons, slip their hands into their visible pockets, and smile at you as they pull out your wallet and empty it of cash and cards.

Not-so-sophisticated pickpockets will stop if you ask out loud, “What the hell are you doing?” “We apologize for the inconvenience,” says Suri. “It’s an opt-out system, dude.”

It sounds ridiculous. But this appears to be the approach the government is pursuing to appease AI companies. A consultation meeting will be held soon, Financial Times coverageThis will allow AI companies to scrape content from individuals and organizations unless they explicitly opt out of having their data used.

The AI revolution is both rapid and comprehensive. Even if you’re not one of them, 200 million people If you log on to ChatGPT every week or dabble in generative AI competitors like Claude or Gemini, you’ve undoubtedly interacted with an AI system, knowingly or not. But to keep the AI fire from burning out, we need two constantly replenishing sources. One is energy. This is why AI companies are getting into the nuclear power plant acquisition business. And the other thing is data.

Data is essential to AI systems because it helps them recreate how we interact. If the AI has any “knowledge”, which is highly disputed given that it is actually a fancy pattern matching machine, it comes from the data used to train it. .

In some studies, large-scale language models such as ChatGPT Training data is missing By 2026, that appetite will be huge. But without that data, the AI revolution could stall. Tech companies know this, which is why they license content from left, right, and center. But it has created friction, and an unofficial mantra has continued in the sector over the past decade.move fast and break things” causes no friction.

This is why they are already trying to steer us towards an opt-out approach to copyright, rather than an opt-in regime, where everything we type, post and share is locked in until we say no. It is destined to become AI training data by default. Companies must ask us to use their data. We can already see how companies are nudging us towards this reality. This week, X began notifying users of changes to its terms of service that will allow all posts to be used for the following purposes: train grokElon Musk’s AI model designed to compete with ChatGPT. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, then made similar changes, resulting in the widespread urban legend of “Goodbye Meta AI,” which purportedly invalidates legal agreements.

It’s clear why AI companies want an opt-out system. If you ask most people if they want to use something in the books they write, the music they produce, or the posts and photos they share on social networks to train an AI, they’ll probably say no. And the gears of the AI revolution will turn off. Why the government would want to enable such a change to the concept of copyright ownership that has existed to date. over 300 yearsis stipulated by law. 100 or moreit’s not so obvious. But like many things, it seems to come down to money.

The government faces lobbying from big tech companies suggesting this is a requirement for the country to be considered as a place to invest in AI innovation and share the spoils. A lobbying document prepared by Google suggests support for its approach to an opt-out copyright regime.guarantee uk In the future, it could become a competitive arena for developing and training AI models. ”So the government’s discussion of how to frame the issue, with opt-out options already on the table as a countermeasure, is a major victory for big tech lobbyists.

With so much money flowing into the tech industry and high levels of investment going into AI projects, Keir Starmer understandably doesn’t want to miss out on the potential benefits. It would be remiss of the Government not to consider how to appease the tech companies developing world-changing technology and help turn the UK into an AI powerhouse.

But this is not the answer. To be clear, the copyright system in question in the UK means that companies effectively own every post we make, every book we write, every book we create. This means it will be possible to add nicknames to songs and to our data without being penalized. That requires us to sign up to every individual service and say, “No, we don’t want you to chop up our data and spit out a poor composite image of us.” The number can number in the hundreds, from large technology companies to small research institutes.

Lest we forget, OpenAI – now Over $150 billion – The company plans to abandon its original nonprofit principles and become a for-profit company. Rather than relying on the charity of the general public, we have enough funds in our coffers to pay for our training data. Surely such companies can afford to line their pockets, not ours. So please let go.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Tech-savvy Gen Zers opt for simple ‘dumb phones’ to escape smartphone stress

Almost enough to stop doomscrolling. A boring device is now cool.

The Boring Phone is a new featureless flip phone that is catching the attention of young people seeking to switch from smartphones to basic phones.

The latest model, a collaboration between Heineken beer and fashion retailer Bodega, made waves when introduced at Milan Design Week this month, where designers worldwide showcase their latest trends. The Boring Phone is part of a growing trend of dumb phones evolving from Gen Z’s skepticism towards data collection and attention-grabbing technology. This skepticism has revitalized retro cultural items, known as nutro, seen in the resurgence of vinyl records, cassettes, fanzines, 8-bit games, and vintage cell phones.

“I always despised being constantly connected,” said Lana Ali. The 29-year-old, previously in finance and now a music producer and rapper known as Surya Sen, added, “I tried using a smartphone, but I always return to simplicity.”

Nostalgia for “brick” phones with long-lasting batteries led to the relaunch of the Nokia 3310 in 2017, but the trend really took off in the US last year, sparked by TikTokers using the #bringbackflipphones hashtag. HMD, behind the Nokia relaunch, saw foldable phone sales double by April 2023, while Punkt, which focuses on minimalist phones, also experienced a significant sales boost.


The Boring Phone is a retro flip phone with minimal functionality.

Mintel mentioned that Apple and Samsung are not yet threatened. Nine out of ten phones are smartphones, and dumb phones remain a niche market, as per Joe Birch, a technology analyst at the research firm. “Nevertheless, there are signs that this generation is altering their smartphone habits, and we are concerned about the potential negative effects of constant digital connectivity driving this change,” Birch added. “For instance, three out of five Gen Zers express a desire to disconnect from the digital world.”

This shift towards offline life or digital minimalism is also evident in Gen Z’s reduced use of social media. They are the only generation to have cut back on social media usage since 2021, as per GWI. Yet, seniors are also undergoing digital detox, including Lars Silberbauer, HMD’s chief marketing officer, who mentioned a transitional period after disconnecting. “In the first few hours, you may feel anxious,” he explained. “But soon, focus returns, and previous activities resume.”

According to technology analyst Portulance Institute, the internet now appears more as a surveillance tool for brands, governments, and scammers rather than a place for exploration or meeting interesting individuals, causing more young adults to prioritize privacy.

Older tech can offer greater freedom. Sampling music has become a challenge for emerging artists due to Spotify and YouTube’s algorithms, which detect uncleared samples. However, an underground artist can press 500 copies of an EP record and distribute it to DJs and fans without hurdles.

The downside to going offline is the increasing reliance on smartphones in today’s world. Hannah Whelan from the Good Things Foundation’s Data Poverty Lab noted that 2.4 million UK households cannot afford mobile contracts, and 2 million young people lack access to learning devices, hindering essential services now online.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The Luddite Club of New York schoolchildren announced their decision to switch from iPhones to flip phones in December 2022, although Punkt founder Petter Nebby noted that smartphones are still necessary. “It’s impractical,” he commented. “While we discuss banning smartphones in UK schools, education systems rely heavily on online tasks for scheduling and assignments. I advocate for banning smartphones for children, but it’s a complex issue that requires balance.”

Piers Garrett, a 27-year-old tech sales executive, found a balance by using a Litephone, an e-ink device without apps. However, he eventually gave up. “The concept was good, but I lasted only six months,” he admitted. “WhatsApp is the main mode of communication. Now I maintain a strict app usage policy, only using banking and transit apps and turning off notifications. In the morning, I prioritize personal activities like coffee or reading, noticing a significant mental clarity improvement.”

Source: www.theguardian.com