#872 in Literature & fiction books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product

Reddit mentions of Accelerando (Singularity Book 3)

Sentiment score: 3
Reddit mentions: 5

We found 5 Reddit mentions of Accelerando (Singularity Book 3). Here are the top ones.

Accelerando (Singularity Book 3)
Buying options
View on Amazon.com
or
Specs:
Release dateJuly 2005

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Found 5 comments on Accelerando (Singularity Book 3):

u/cstross · 31 pointsr/printSF

Yes, although obviously I'd rather you paid for it :-)

u/RagaTanha · 20 pointsr/singularity

The singularity is near by ray kurzweil has all the science behind it.

Accelerando

and Singularity Sky by Charles Stross for Fiction.

u/JamisonW · 10 pointsr/printSF

This is my favorite sub-genre as well. Stross, Vinge, and Rucker are all computer science professionals as well as writers. Doctrow is an uber FOSS geek and uses lots of current tech in his work.

I highly recommend Stross's "Accelerando" and "Rapture of the Nerds".

Accelerando
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000OIZUC6/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1370432920&sr=8-2&pi=SL75

Rapture
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0080K3HTI/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1370432982&sr=8-2&pi=SL75

u/markday · 5 pointsr/BurningMan

Shirt cocker reporting for duty.

A "shirt cocker" would be

a) a person at Burning Man wearing a shirt but no pants (more talked about than witnessed, these days...).

b) a bit of classic Burning Man lore, being considered by some, one of the few groups it's basically open-season on mocking (and firing pants at : see trouser-cannon, not the porno kind....)

My point would be that (most of the time) the person standing around with his pants off, offering creepy back-rubs, putting you off your bacon-breakfast in camp, or just merrily wandering the playa, is not simply lacking pants because they didn't bring enough trousers. It was a choice made for reasons which we can only speculate on, and attempts to simplify things to the most theopreticaly-plausible answer will often miss the point entirely (that said, I'm going with "feels amazing, seriously, you should try it").

It is a far-from-perfect analogy expressing my belief that Mr Yudkozky's argument is only compelling if you accept that the forces of rational-actors within an utterly-simplistic behavioral-economics model will solve more problems than his rubbish idea causes, via unintended consequence, and that all parties here are feeling even remotely rational.

Or to put it another way (I love sci-fi movies and I had a coffee...) THIS IS HOW SKYNET HAPPENS...

Open on two human figures, faces smeared with soot, emerging from a landscape dark with smoke and rubble, torn rebar jutting like skeletal fingers from blocks of concrete scattered like so many pieces of stale bread cast towards a flock of radioactive ducks.

A device hovers overhead that is 50% hover-drone and 50% scalpels.

Just seconds before it descends to chop our two protagonists into carpaccio, one of them howls, despondently, "Damn you AI researchers! You understood too much about machines, yet nothing at all about the human heart"

(camera lens obliterated by a stream of red mist).

I hope that has cleared up everything. I really should lay off the caffeine. If it makes it any clearer, you've seen the end of Planet of the Apes, right?

On a tangent, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000OIZUC6/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1 is a great book, no?