Science fiction begetting Science Fact:

I suppose Google Glass and other VR stuff are among the few actual examples, and even then the claim is somewhat controversial.

There are plenty of examples of fictional descriptions of technology preceding the actual tech: easily going back to Jules Verne's submarines. But usually it's not very scientific nor practical to emulate fiction.

>>47707570
Interesting! Are there any instances you can think of where the creator/lead developer directly states that they were attempting to emulate something that they saw, or read in fiction?

why do your questions read as if it were taken from an homework assignment ?

>>47707383
Tablets

>>47707677
Well, I am currently writing an essay on the subject, but it's a topic of research that I came up with myself. I suppose it's just how I write.

File: 84525main_warp16.gif (69KB, 677x467px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 677x467px

I'd say that pretty much anything space related.

Automatic sliding doors.

Seriously, look it up – I remember someone from the cast of the old Star Trek series saying that invention was to him most impressive at the time.

automatic doors -> star trek
flip phones -> star trek
lasers -> war of the worlds
submarines -> 20k leagues under the sea
helicopter -> Clipper of the Clouds
rocket ->War of the Worlds
atomic bomb -> The World Set Free
taser -> Tom Swift
quicktime -> star trek
tablets -> startrek
universal translaters (google's voice to text/translate/voice synth) -> STAAAAAR TREEEEKKKKK
hologram communication -> star wars
roomba -> jetsons
earbuds -> Fahrenheit 451
portable ultrasound -> STAR BLAH BLAH STREKIDY AAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>47707655
I've worked with designers who've drawn inspiration from popular fictional works. UI and industrial design. But they'd never admit to copying anything, and those are examples of the look and feel of the product mimicing something that was witnessed in fiction, rather than the function.

Home automation might be relevant - automated houses were largely fiction in the last century.

One product that should be mentioned is Cortana.

File: Jetsons.jpg (36KB, 499x363px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 499x363px

>>47707696
>>47707771
>>47707859

I wonder, though. Are these coincidences, or direct attempts to emulate the future-tech? I mean, The Jetsons had video chat long before Skype. Does that mean that Skype was influenced by The Jetsons? That's what I'm trying to find out.

If there's an actual quote from one of the developers of these devices that suggests that they were directly attempting to emulate the functionality of their fictional counterparts, then I've got the perfect lead for my research!

>>47707916
Ooh! That's good stuff! Noted!

This is actually my first time here on /g/ and you guys are showing that you're quite the helpful bunch! Thanks for all of your input so far!

>>47707931
most of what I listed was people saying "yeah I did that on purpose"

>>47707961
>This is actually my first time here on /g/ and you guys are showing that you're quite the helpful bunch! Thanks for all of your input so far!
Don't be fooled. This place is a cesspit.

>>47707977
I'll look up sources! If what you say is true then I might actually have a workable thesis, here!

>>47707987
First impressions are everything, man. Mine is quite positive so far.

>>47708011
>thesis
fucking knew it was homework

>>47708011
>Thesis
>homework
>helpful
SEE THIS SHIT IS WHY WE'RE USUALLY ASSHOLES BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT YOU COMIGN HERE SHITTING THE PLACE US
WEEEE THOUGHT YOU WERE STARTING A THREAD ABOUT INTERESTING IDEAS NOT DOING YOUR FUCKING RESEARCH FOR YOU FAGGOT

>>47708132
I didn't ask anyone to do research for anyone. Yes, I'm writing an essay on the subject. All I asked is if anyone knew, off the top of their heads, if they knew of any direct, confirmed relationships between science fiction and science fact.
Assignment, or not, I do think that it is an interesting topic of discussion. Is it not?

File: HelloMinnie.png (324KB, 677x677px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 677x677px

>>47708180
>>47707707
As a matter of fact, I made that clear up-top right here. Your fault for not reading. I was never trying to ruse anyone. I chose this topic of study because I am interested in it. Yes, this discussion has helped me get an idea of where I'd like to start with my essay, but that doesn't mean that I don't wish to discuss the topic further simply for the sake of discussion.

>>47708180
ignore that guy
just don't let it be known that's why you're asking next time
incidentally there's a video from 1988 where Isaac Azimov predicted the world wide web
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CwUuU6C4pk

a full year before it was even a proposal

Neal Stephenson pretty much described Google Earth in his book Snow Crash, before Google Earth existed.

>>47707383
The touch screens in Star Trek: The Next Generation were a big deal back in the day. I remember watching a behind the scenes special that discussed if they were ever going to be feasible.

>>47707859
To expand this. Google says the end goal is for it to act like the star trek computer in tng.

>>47708180
sorry it's the beginning of part two where you can see the prediction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJAIERgWhZQ

>>47708242
>>47708283

Wow! This is actually really fascinating! I knew before I even began researching that I'd come across Azimov at some point, but this is really something special. I tell ya.

File: Neuromancer_(Book)[1].jpg (55KB, 392x651px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 392x651px

>>47708242
Pic related. 1984. And that's not considering same-setting short-stories he released in magazines in the preceding years

>>47707383
Video chatting. Apple directly copied the call starting animation from Back to the Future into iChat and FaceTime
https://youtu.be/Km6bFBSVty4?t=1s
https://youtu.be/5JG_a9VAvNo?t=1m36s

>>47707931
They are not coincidence and they are not emulation. They are cases of sci fi writers being reasonably good futurists. Sci Fi tech is often based on reasonable, logical predictions. They are often quite wrong about how long things will take, what order things will happen in, and so on, but it doesn't take a genius to know that certain things will be possible eventually, and that there will be a market for them, and so they will probably exist at some point.

>>47708391
Video-calling hardly "exists" though. Not in the way sci-fi predicted.

Sure. It's a very real thing and I could video-call my friends if I wanted to. But I don't. We're all sticking to voice calls

File: mfw_this_thread.gif (52KB, 129x111px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 129x111px

This thread makes me happy.

File: 4NrgalaxynexuVwQ.png (141KB, 1148x1994px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1148x1994px

>>47708318
>>47708283
>>47708259

These are fantastic instances of brilliant writers predicting the future of technology. This is some solid evidence supporting that it is, indeed, possible to predict future systems before they are even proposed through the medium of science fiction!

But, perhaps, that's only half of the equation?

If it can be verified that these same technologies were influenced by the fictional works that predicted their development and use in the FIRST place then we truly have an instance of fictional technology being directly responsible for the development of future technology!

God, if that sequence of
Prediction -> Inspiration -> Development
holds true for something as big as the touch screen, for example, then that's a really big fuckin' deal, in't it?

>>47708413
So what? I'm not saying that every work of science fiction ever has come true exactly or is going to. I'm saying that Sci Fi writers put thought into what the future is going to be like, and so it's not surprising that some of it, whether partially or completely, comes true, eventually, sort of. Anyone who understands science and technology and keeps up with bleeding edge developments could to it reasonably well, but nobody can do it perfectly.

>>47708435
Me too, man. This is getting far deeper than I initially imagined.

>>47708472
I actually love how Azimov continues to talk about how people think that being a man means no longer learning, these days we mock people who don't keep up with modern information

god the past must have sucked ass

>>47708472
>>47708259
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek#History_and_production
>The first regular episode ("The Man Trap") of Star Trek: The Original Series aired on Thursday, September 8, 1966.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History
>E.A. Johnson described his work on capacitive touch screens in a short article which is published in 1965

Early research was being done at the time that the show originally aired. A big part of being good at making predictions for Sci Fi is simply being familiar with contemporary bleeding edge research.

File: tony-stark-hologram.jpg (340KB, 2104x1184px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 2104x1184px

>>47708687
I found that too, Anon! It seems like, in this case, the fiction and fact were being developed in parallel. My next question I've been thinking about is then can we attribute the SUCCESS of the touch screen to Star Trek's interpretation? Were people attracted to idea because it reminded them of something from science fiction?

Can we predict that Windows 10's hologram headset will receive a similar boost of popularity because, with it, people can pretend they're Tony Stark in Iron Man? I think that's another important point. Even if we can emulate future tech, its success in the market is also an important factor.

>>47708830
>My next question I've been thinking about is then can we attribute the SUCCESS of the touch screen to Star Trek's interpretation? Were people attracted to idea because it reminded them of something from science fiction?
I don't think so. I can think of a few cases where that didn't happen, like video calling and microwave ovens, but none where it did.

One thing I can think of that might actually only exist because somebody saw it on TV is smart watches, but I don't see them every achieving ubiquity.

Asimov also wrote about geostationary satellites some considersble years before anyone put them up there

>>47709083

I hope they succeed.

Couldn't give less of a fuck about smart watches myself, but since our technological process is now completely consumer driven, smart watches are going to speed up the miniaturization of tech quite a bit.
Not to mention a need for better low power processors and better battery tech.