NationStates Post-Modern Tech Community Thread

[The Macabees]

In general for me the claims that MT = now + x years (like the infamous now + 20 years claim) are nothing else than attempts of people to wank in their threads and to give themselves an advantage by using technologies that are not in service now.

Thanks for your thoughts, as always, Cuscy.

I agree that there is a tendency to do that. I remember, back in the day, how it was often fueled by the competitiveness of miltech more generally; there was a lot of pressure to compete. I've always figured this is why milrealism became a thing -- something, note, that is hard for me to grapple with because I am from a generation where milrealism could never worked [a less sophisticated time, for sure]. How do you go about alleviation these issues in your own threads?

[UniversalCommons]

There are a lot of technologies that were never developed or viewed as absurd in the past. Alternative technologies should be considered as well like domed cities, vertical farms, sea farms, arcologies, living machines, sea dart fighter planes, underwater aircraft carriers, stealth blimps, sea homes, and similar things. A lot of technology does not get developed because it does not fit into current ways of thinking.

[Democratic Exodian Territories]

There are a lot of technologies that were never developed or viewed as absurd in the past. Alternative technologies should be considered as well like domed cities, vertical farms, sea farms, arcologies, living machines, sea dart fighter planes, underwater aircraft carriers, stealth blimps, sea homes, and similar things. A lot of technology does not get developed because it does not fit into current ways of thinking.

I get everything but "living machines".

[UniversalCommons]

There are a lot of technologies that were never developed or viewed as absurd in the past. Alternative technologies should be considered as well like domed cities, vertical farms, sea farms, arcologies, living machines, sea dart fighter planes, underwater aircraft carriers, stealth blimps, sea homes, and similar things. A lot of technology does not get developed because it does not fit into current ways of thinking.

I get everything but "living machines".

Living Machines are a green technology for wastewater, greywater, and other systems. http://www.livingmachines.com/Home.aspx This kind of technology could abate a variety of environmental problems. They are used fairly regularly. Artificial wetlands for sewage treatment would be another example of living machines. It is the kind of technology that stems from artificial ecosystems like CELSS Closed Ecological Life Support Systems. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK217836/

[Ardoki]

I think MT should include all technologies which currently exist or are currently feasible; however, I understand that some people prefer strict realism so I tend to keep the more unrealistic stuff in my nation (like genetically engineered elderly dancers) away from serious RPs (or I water it down so it can be considered realistic).

Personally, I think a good story which everyone enjoys and is constructive towards the visions everyone has for their nations is most important part by far. Realism should not come before that. But that is just my opinion, and I understand and respect those who disagree with my view.

[Allanea]

There are a lot of technologies that were never developed or viewed as absurd in the past. Alternative technologies should be considered as well like domed cities, vertical farms, sea farms, arcologies, living machines, sea dart fighter planes, underwater aircraft carriers, stealth blimps, sea homes, and similar things. A lot of technology does not get developed because it does not fit into current ways of thinking.

It's worth saying that the reverse is also true. When adapting technologies for Nationstates, or generally reading about hypothetical technologies in general, Bastiat's dictum about the seen and the unseen should be referred to. Very often when a researcher or a media outlet claims oh, here's this technology that hasn't been adapted world-wide, oh cruel world, we would be such a better place if we had used XYZ, they omit some subtle or less-subtle reason why XYZ technology might have worked in a literal sense, but was undesirable for some social, economic, or environmental reasons.

One item like this is arcologies. There have been several attempts by architects to build large, enormous apartment complexes that would include within them most of the facilities and stores and so forth that a regular neighborhood has (sometimes called 'streets in the sky'), but they've often met awful problems when they were actually populated by denizens. (Others have succeeded excellently, but it's not just an issue of 'well, can we build this.). In my nation there are arcologies, but they are 'failed' arcologies, so to speak – enormous multi-story complexes, somewhat inspired by the arcologies in the Judge Dredd franchise or the Darco arcology in SimCities – they definitely 'work' in terms of standing up and not falling, but you wouldn't want to live there.

This question is often alluded to in our Discord server, so I figured I'd bring it up for discussion here:

How do you define PMT?

I'm curious as to how you, in an admittedly fractured community, see yourself with respect to the genre you've self-selected into. How do you define that community?

I think that PMT and MT are actually often imperfect descriptors for what players want to do.

MT is often said to mean: "I want to roleplay with technologies that are feasible given our current level of knowledge", but usually what you'll find is that MT roleplayers want to have, is economies and technologies broadly comparable to what actually exists in the real-world.

There is a range of technologies that were shown to be feasible (in terms of the fact that there were feasibility studies by incredibly qualified engineers showing they were feasible, and sometimes prototype testing) given 1980s technologies. But many MT players will prefer not to have those technologies used in their RPs (and they're entitled to this, of course).

PMT is essentially used by players to imply 20 Minutes Into The Future – technology that is slightly more advanced than what we have available to us IRL. However the definition of what's 'slightly' more advanced is variable. In terms of what you should be using, I think, a good start would be sites like NextBigFuture.com, cyberpunk fiction, and maybe some Pentagon feasibility studies.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

This question is often alluded to in our Discord server, so I figured I'd bring it up for discussion here:

How do you define PMT?

I'm curious as to how you, in an admittedly fractured community, see yourself with respect to the genre you've self-selected into. How do you define that community?

To be honest, I've recently come to the realization that MT & PMT do not have to be contradictory strands, because it depends on how you define them. If you define MT as anything certainly possible with present technology and PMT as anything which could not be available in RL (e.g. due to economic factors) there's an interesting intersection.

As another note, I think that saying MT is "everything that is currently in use" and defining PMT is contradiction to that is absurd unless you use only exact RL technology, which is boring, unimaginative, and extremely unrealistic (as RL weapons are designed in RL circumstances, which NS can't possibly recreate exactly).

[Vistora]

This question is often alluded to in our Discord server, so I figured I'd bring it up for discussion here:

How do you define PMT?

I'm curious as to how you, in an admittedly fractured community, see yourself with respect to the genre you've self-selected into. How do you define that community?

My interpretation (as I've let known, sometimes a tad bitterly, on the Discord) of PMT is likely one of the most expansive to be encountered, for the simple reasons of me wanting to be inclusive as is necessary for the term "PMT" to serve its actual purpose as a general-designation tag and not an exclusive epithet hoarded by a clique.

Put in the simplest way, PMT is everything between MT(+) and FT. Now, what exactly delineates those boundaries is notoriously fuzzy, as I'm sure we can all attest; segments of the MT community have long occupied and sometimes abused that grey zone so long it spawned its own designation of MT+. With FT, it's an even bigger mess, albeit one we've come up with a remarkably good heuristic with which to contain it; the presence or absence of FTL travel and communication.

And between the well defined but poorly delineated MT, and its opposite in FT, lies PMT, a nebulous catchall for whatever is clearly neither. That it is amorphous strikes some as inadequate, yet to demand narrow specificity is absolutely contrary to the point; PMT is supposed to be ill-defined, otherwise it would not perform its job. MT is a good designation because it's self-explanatory and, barring lapses, more easily enforced than any other tech category. FT is a good designation because it's a handy bin to throw the wankers in the FTL cutoff provides a firm and consistent criterion that more effectively separates two diametrically different sorts of faction than any other single metric, pretty much to the same degree as pre- and (post-)industrial societies. PMT can only be a good designation if it effectively encompasses the many nations that are neither, and does so in a manner easy enough to interpret--hence its negative definition as between MT and FT.

I could wax philosophical about the ideas PMT settings represent, but, to be frank, that would be presumptuous and honestly rather ad-hoc bullshit. This definition isn't pretty, but it works much better than most I encounter, which in so often being used to scoop up dubious MT+(20-50) polities is then defined around them, inevitably leaving large blank spots. Accepting that would mean leaving a good five of the seven major canons I inhabit dead in space. The idea of overlap or fluidity are not inimical to me by any means, but exclusion absolutely is.

[Post War America]

This question is often alluded to in our Discord server, so I figured I'd bring it up for discussion here:

How do you define PMT?

I'm curious as to how you, in an admittedly fractured community, see yourself with respect to the genre you've self-selected into. How do you define that community?

I feel that PMT is, in the broadest sense a technological base that starts with technology that is in early testing phases (nuclear fusion, nanotechnology, genetic modification etc.), going towards the development of faster than light travel. While I am not quite is strict as Cusc in terms of cutting off MT at the what's in service now, I certainly feel moderately vexed by people who claim to be "MT" but run around with railguns, and fully realized military exoskeletons in mass deployment (which are the most common applications of "MT+20" tech that I generally see, not say for example bioluminscent road paint which is one of the things a friend of mine suggested), especially, when I, admittedly for the sake of sparing myself tons of extra work, stick to in service stuff with my MT puppets.

That being said, I believe this definition can be stretched pretty hard, and generally think PMT should be limited to largely realistic, or at least semi-realistic extensions of current or experimental technology. For example, I would consider someone who used a technological base similar to that of the nations in the The Expanse to be FT, rather than PMT, as while that universe, and any similar to it lack FTL, the technological base I feel is pushed as hard as it can feasibly go without actually hitting FTL, alternatively stretching the possibilities of nanotech and the like I would also consider some form of FT, though perhaps the most egregious example of "not technically FTL" "PMT" was one nation I saw running around with gigantic mechadragons with laser breath, which I consider to be just as, if not more offensive than using railguns in MT.

In short methinks that the boundary between MT and PMT is a technical one, while the boundary between PMT and FT is more philosophical, while some technological definitions can be drawn, the more appropriate boundary is more of philosophy, whereas an FT society should be radically different from our own, operating primarily in the stars, PMT should be more defined as a society that operates much closer to home, with thinking based around being primarily on a single planet rather than in a system, or more importantly within multiple systems.

How do you define PMT?

MT = everything that is currently in use.

PMT = everything that is theoretically possible above.


In general for me the claims that MT = now + x years (like the infamous now + 20 years claim) are nothing else than attempts of people to wank in their threads and to give themselves an advantage by using technologies that are not in service now

I do not however have any problem with PMTers as long as they acknowledge that their tech is PMT and use it accordingly in threads that are PMT, which is sadly something very few of them do....

I'd like to field a followup question if you'd allow it. How do you feel about technology that is undergoing limited field trials? Do you believe this also to fall in PMT, or do you believe it would be acceptable as experimental, or limited deployment MT?

[New Aeyariss]

I'd like to field a followup question if you'd allow it. How do you feel about technology that is undergoing limited field trials? Do you believe this also to fall in PMT, or do you believe it would be acceptable as experimental, or limited deployment MT?

I do not have an issue with such technology being tested, yet people ought to actually realize that it often has holes and there is a reason why it's not in widespread use. For example let's take the issue of previously mentioned railguns: while US Navy technically has a working railgun, it is not anywhere near operational capability.

Even myself I am now developing an UAV which could theoretically be turned into an unmanned fighter due to being a descendant of a target drone - yet faces a lot of limitations from other factors that effectively deny him that chance...

What people miss is that young technologies tend to be EXTREMELY vulnerable and full of holes. Iraqi insurgents hacking US drones is a perfect example. Even if today many of the original holes that permitted problems like GPS spoofing attacks or transmission interception to exist have been responded to, that still does not eliminate all of them. That is why I prefer to focus on tested, reliable technology that will be far less vunerable to emerging threats.

A lot of the issues comes from the myth that technology will win wars - which is nothing else than a lie. Sadly, many NSers believe in that myth and feel a need to ram up the tech level to outclass their opposition.

[The Macabees]

Has anybody here read Cixin Liu's Three-Body Problem trilogy?

[The Macabees]

If you haven't, it's a very interesting science-fiction book, originally written in Chinese and recently translated.

It's basically a somewhat-PMT world, but where an alien race (that is far more advanced than us) has stopped all scientific progress in quantum physics on Earth. It will take something like 400 years for their fleet to arrive and they want to maintain technological parity.

The author does a really good job of creating a world where existing tech is taken to its limit, but still fundamentally constrained because there are no more scientific breakthroughs.

Given the talk about tech and tech speculation, I think many of you would find it interesting. It has the double plus of being Chinese literature, which is not something most non-Chinese speaking Americans* are typically subjected to.

* Yes, many of you aren't American, I know.

[Lord Dominator]

I have read it, and I quite enjoyed it

[Ardoki]

I have heard good things about it, but am yet to read it.

I've never really read sci-fi books, but I have the first Expanse book and might start that soon if the fantasy book I've ordered doesn't arrive in the next few days.

[Naval Monte]

Tagging.

[Post War America]

I have heard good things about it, but am yet to read it.

I've never really read sci-fi books, but I have the first Expanse book and might start that soon if the fantasy book I've ordered doesn't arrive in the next few days.

It's a good book, I'd suggest reading it anyway.

[Naval Monte]

So when it comes to space based technologies what would be consider PMT?

[Vistora]

So when it comes to space based technologies what would be consider PMT?

The dividing line between PMT and FT is commonly held to be faster-than-light (FTL) communication and/or travel technologies. While I'm an advocate for contextual flexibility that might blur that line somewhat, it's still a surprisingly excellent heuristic benchmark, since the implications and consequences of FTL more often than not touch upon the real, harder-to-define substance that divides the two classifications.

Elsewise, it's a little harder to draw firm boundaries, but a number of trends stand out. Megaconstructs on continental, planetary, stellar, or even larger scales, like Halo/Niven rings and Dyson spheres are quite clearly FT, since the resources and technologies required to construct those are undoubtedly beyond the reach of currently-conceivable civilizations.

[Naval Monte]

So when it comes to space based technologies what would be consider PMT?

The dividing line between PMT and FT is commonly held to be faster-than-light (FTL) communication and/or travel technologies. While I'm an advocate for contextual flexibility that might blur that line somewhat, it's still a surprisingly excellent heuristic benchmark, since the implications and consequences of FTL more often than not touch upon the real, harder-to-define substance that divides the two classifications.

Elsewise, it's a little harder to draw firm boundaries, but a number of trends stand out. Megaconstructs on continental, planetary, stellar, or even larger scales, like Halo/Niven rings and Dyson spheres are quite clearly FT, since the resources and technologies required to construct those are undoubtedly beyond the reach of currently-conceivable civilizations.

Where would you place Cowboy Bebop on the scale? Because I have a faction who uses PMT tech and if I go with space tech I want it to be somewhere close to Bebop.

[Vistora]

The dividing line between PMT and FT is commonly held to be faster-than-light (FTL) communication and/or travel technologies. While I'm an advocate for contextual flexibility that might blur that line somewhat, it's still a surprisingly excellent heuristic benchmark, since the implications and consequences of FTL more often than not touch upon the real, harder-to-define substance that divides the two classifications.

Elsewise, it's a little harder to draw firm boundaries, but a number of trends stand out. Megaconstructs on continental, planetary, stellar, or even larger scales, like Halo/Niven rings and Dyson spheres are quite clearly FT, since the resources and technologies required to construct those are undoubtedly beyond the reach of currently-conceivable civilizations.

Where would you place Cowboy Bebop on the scale? Because I have a faction who uses PMT tech and if I go with space tech I want it to be somewhere close to Bebop.

Well, much to my shame, I've never actually seen Cowboy Bebop and so cannot confidently pass full judgement on that. That said, I do know enough to make some comments.

Cowboy Bebop is a partial example of a "Space Western" setting, which is not quite straightforwardly sci-fi since the genre is characterized by advanced, almost invariably FT tech only present in a very sporadic fashion. However, the existence of hypergates to facilitate rapid space travel, even only within the bounds of the solar system, is more solidly in FT territory. Again, however, do not take my word on this as doctrine, since I am not familiar enough with CB to say for sure.

[UniversalCommons]

Cowboy Bebop is an odd mix of MT and High PMT. It is PMT being nostalgic for MT a lot of the time.

[Naval Monte]

Cowboy Bebop is an odd mix of MT and High PMT. It is PMT being nostalgic for MT a lot of the time.

There is also the fact that many analog tech being present but that is more due to the year the anime was made.

Well, much to my shame, I've never actually seen Cowboy Bebop and so cannot confidently pass full judgement on that. That said, I do know enough to make some comments.

Cowboy Bebop is a partial example of a "Space Western" setting, which is not quite straightforwardly sci-fi since the genre is characterized by advanced, almost invariably FT tech only present in a very sporadic fashion. However, the existence of hypergates to facilitate rapid space travel, even only within the bounds of the solar system, is more solidly in FT territory. Again, however, do not take my word on this as doctrine, since I am not familiar enough with CB to say for sure.

Yeah the gates would put it on the FT level but the ships in the show are surprisingly realistic as one of the main ships has a rotating hab insid fir artificial gravity and many ships have thrusters to move around. Also kinetic weapons are used every time even with enery weapons present, (which I suspect may be due to the complexity of maintaining them and them being expensive to get).

[The Macabees]

Elsewise, it's a little harder to draw firm boundaries, but a number of trends stand out. Megaconstructs on continental, planetary, stellar, or even larger scales, like Halo/Niven rings and Dyson spheres are quite clearly FT, since the resources and technologies required to construct those are undoubtedly beyond the reach of currently-conceivable civilizations.

I think this is a big part of it and it makes answering the question tough.

The truth is that part of the dividing line between PMT and FT is economic, just like the dividing line between 1940 and 2000 is in large part economic.

To make a lot of FT scenarios "realistic," we have to assume certain resource costs, which assume certain technological advancements, resource discoveries, capital accumulation, etc.

And how do we realistically ask of anyone to consider these factors?


Personally, for me "PMT in space" is pretty much the start of a "space economy" (asteroid mining and the MASSIVE capital structure that revolves around this, but is still archaic compared to an FT civilization).

But if FTL is invented in 2500 and it's 2400, can't we assume a greater, more advanced capital structure?

At the end of the day, what it really comes down to is: what is the general opinion of your community? What jives with the other RPers you play with?


In GD, we get around a lot of the tough canonical issues by looking at it from an "expanded universe" perspective, as well. It's canon, but it's like alternative canon. Or, canon that doesn't necessarily need to be considered alongside "main canon." That way players have more artistic freedom without creating canonical incongruencies that would create OOC conflict.

[Naval Monte]

I think I should explain more on this faction of mines. They are a faction who live in a alternative verison of a MT world that is like a dark reflection of ours, but beneath the veneer of normality is a secret world filled monstrous beings, occult conspiracies, unexplainable alien activities, anomalous phenomenon, and eldritch truths.

The faction I have use modern technology but their willingness to contain and study the anomalies of their world to allow them to create technologies that are either not anomlous themselves but are beyond what is available now (as in PMT) and others that clear work with some paranormal discipline or mechanism (this would fall into FanT but a few can replicate the effects of FT). I should mention that some of the PMT do have some paranormal components but they only serve on helping the machines being functional (like serving as batteries for gauss guns or exo-suits)

I know this thread was made for nationstates but I wonder if it can help with secretive factions who are global organizations. Before you say it no they are not the SCP Foundation, both capture and contain anomalies yes, and they even study them. But my faction actually uses them for their mission and have it in their mission to eventually use the anomalies they have for future use and benefits to the rest of humanity.

Also even though there is magic, psionics, and other paranormal stuff in their world I try to keep a semi hardish sci fi stance with their tech. Both to keep a sense of realism with the setting and to use that realism to make the supernatural elements far more alien and strange. Even the magic there follows a more hard magic stance than soft magic.

But just to keep with this thread my nation is MT with elements of PMT entering the picture (don't look at the factbooks, they are old and will be replaced once I get around to changing/updating my nation).

[Vistora]

I think I should explain more on this faction of mines. They are a faction who live in a alternative verison of a MT world that is like a dark reflection of ours, but beneath the veneer of normality is a secret world filled monstrous beings, occult conspiracies, unexplainable alien activities, anomalous phenomenon, and eldritch truths.

The faction I have use modern technology but their willingness to contain and study the anomalies of their world to allow them to create technologies that are either not anomlous themselves but are beyond what is available now (as in PMT) and others that clear work with some paranormal discipline or mechanism (this would fall into FanT but a few can replicate the effects of FT). I should mention that some of the PMT do have some paranormal components but they only serve on helping the machines being functional (like serving as batteries for gauss guns or exo-suits)

I know this thread was made for nationstates but I wonder if it can help with secretive factions who are global organizations. Before you say it no they are not the SCP Foundation, both capture and contain anomalies yes, and they even study them. But my faction actually uses them for their mission and have it in their mission to eventually use the anomalies they have for future use and benefits to the rest of humanity.

Also even though there is magic, psionics, and other paranormal stuff in their world I try to keep a semi hardish sci fi stance with their tech. Both to keep a sense of realism with the setting and to use that realism to make the supernatural elements far more alien and strange. Even the magic there follows a more hard magic stance than soft magic.

But just to keep with this thread my nation is MT with elements of PMT entering the picture (don't look at the factbooks, they are old and will be replaced once I get around to changing/updating my nation).

Based on the gist of how you've described your canon, I would personally classify it as "soft-supernatural PMT", since despite a number of advanced anomalous phenomena, it lacks the technological, economic, and quantitative essence of FT. While this nation (my main) is hard mid-high PMT (set over a hundred years in the future, yet very much adhering to the principles of hard sci-fi) soft PMT is a field in which I have been very active, and would be happy to converse with you further on it.

And for the record, this thread was made for NationStates the website, not just nations-states the geopolitical concept.