ŷ������

This is our discussion of the story:

“Today I Am Paul�� by Martin L. Shoemaker

This short story is available to read on-line .

This story is part of the 2015 Nebula Award nominees short story discussion.

I would call this one a natural descendant of Asimov's Robbie.

Insert a complaint about stories that don't have their own ŷ������ page here. What's the point of reading anything if you can't let everyone know you've read it and then rated it on a 5-point scale, I ask you?

Also I did read this story and agree that it is Robbie. I'm really over first person stories where AI are presented as thinking exactly like humans, but faster (which we know only because he tells us the time it takes for the protagonist to think about things, which is not exciting storytelling).

Brendan wrote: "Insert a complaint about stories that don't have their own ŷ������ page here. What's the point of reading anything if you can't let everyone know you've read it and then rated it on a 5-point scale, I ask you?"

OK, it now has a page: Today I Am Paul

Brendan wrote: "I'm really over first person stories where AI are presented as thinking exactly like humans, but faster ..."

These stories are all written by AI's, using human sounding noms de plume. They're trying to prepare us for the takeover.

G33z3r wrote: "OK, it now has a page: Today I Am Paul "

Neat!

Well, since both of you mentioned Asimov's "Robbie", I pulled down I, Robot and reread that story before rereading "Today I Am Paul".

I certainly see some similarities, since both involve robots acting as care providers for a human. Main difference is Robbie is designed as a nanny while "Medical Care Android BRKCX-01932-217JH-98662" (who interestingly never gets any more familiar designation of its own) provides palliative care for the aging. It's also more sophisticated (I was surprised to be reminded Robbie can't talk), including chameleon circuitry to allow for impersonations, not to mention an "empathy net."

I think the idea of elderly care is more likely to provide a basis for animation and automation than childcare. People are just more squeamish leaving their kids to machines (like Mrs. Weston in "Robbie".) And, there are going to be a lot of us drooling old people lying around in the future.

On the other hand, the personality emulation seems a little more specialized. Not all old people are that easily confused, and it seems like a rather expensive add-on.

Similarities aside, I rather liked "Today I Am Paul". Nice robot, bring on our mechanical overlords!

Edited to fix some Dragon transcription errors I didn't catch the first time around. I seem to be slurring this morning.

G33z3r wrote: "Well, since both of you mentioned Asimov's "Robbie", I pulled down I, Robot and reread that story before rereading "Today I Am Paul"...."

That's a good comparison & you're right, there will be more of us soon. One of my uncles had violent episodes toward the end. It was tough on the nurses & my aunt. A machine like 'Paul' would have been great.

This was excellent. I gave it 5 stars 7 a short review here:
/review/show...

I used to work for a company that had Alzheimer's wings in their assisted living facilities. As a computer tech, I only visited occasionally when I was in the area or my expertise was needed. It was heartbreaking to see & the people are often a handful, even for experienced staff with good facilities.

Many people try so hard to keep their loved ones at home when this happens, but they have a hard time keeping up with them if they're still mobile. This seems like a neat idea, although I suppose those who need it most probably won't be able to afford it.

While reading the story, I recalled hearing about the nursing home robots they are working on in Japan. A quick search turned up this video:

I can imagine many benefits from building AI into beds and wheelchairs to monitor and detect changes. Then add speech technology to answer basic questions. That much should be a possibility in the next ten years.

Sarah wrote: "I can imagine many benefits from building AI into beds..."

That made me think of Otomo's anime, in which an AI-automated hospital bed used for elderly care decides to do everything possible to act in the interest of its elderly patient.

I thought this was a very sad story. I finished it feeling bad for the old woman, the family, even the AI. It was good, I really liked it a lot, but it was almost as depressing as Liu's The Paper Menagerie. At least I didn't cry at my desk this time.

Brendan wrote: "Insert a complaint about stories that don't have their own ŷ������ page here. What's the point of reading anything if you can't let everyone know you've read it and then rated it on a 5-point sca..."

Nice enough that G33z3r set up a page, thanks for that.
GR's lack of support for short fiction was exactly the reason why I choose to start my own (mostly for reviewing short stories and my own amusement).

Andreas wrote: "GR's lack of support for short fiction.... "

...is a false statement. They fully support all reading material. GR lists millions of books & stories, but they know they don't have them all which is why anyone can add more. Thousands of GR librarians try to keep the chaos of such a policy at bay & do a pretty good job of it.

Best of all, it's done in a framework which is free to us, the users. They support themselves by selling ads which are vetted far better than many, if not most, vanity blogs, too. Too many blogs are click bait & filled with hacked ad streams. In my company, most of the viruses & Trojans we get come from such places.

Jim, for you it might be good enough. For me, it ist true: Two years ago, I provided reviews for stories in an anthology. Half a year later I found that someone deleted the stories. Bummer! That happened not only once or twice. I don't trust this site w.r.t. shorter works anymore.

I've just joined this discussion, so forgive me if this already known to everyone, but the GR policy on short stories is included here.

I think this may explain your deletions, Andreas.

That policy basically confirms Andreas's position that GR has a lack of support for short fiction.

Jim wrote: "Andreas wrote: "GR's lack of support for short fiction.... "

...is a false statement. They fully support all reading material...."

... is a false statement :)

GR theoretically allows "Today I am Paul" to be in its database because it was published "on the web" (has a url). Stories that merely appear in anthologies or magazines have no such standing (tho people will sometimes enter them anyway, often if they are nominated for or win an award.).

IMO, short stories should a cataloged in the metadata section of anthologies (and magazines). They have metadata for everything but. This is why the is a far better resource for short fiction than GR, and way more rewarding to contribute to: they respect the short story.

On the plus side, GR have liberalized their policy on magazines a bit this past year. (GR allows "periodicals substantially similar to books (e.g., perfectbound literary magazines)", a hilarious definition, based on the binding!, in the age of ebooks.)

Several years ago a couple of other Librarians & I had managed to get the entire run of Asimov's magazine in the database, complete with tables of content & author links for each; then a superlibrarian with a stick up her butt decided to delete the whole run because "magazines aren't books" �� deletions that not only removed the magazines & their ToCs, but also lost all the individual story reviews we'd written for many of those issues. (Fortunately I backup my ŷ������ shelves weekly to my local hard drive, so I still have my reviews, at least.) At least no superduperlibraian has removed a listing of Asimov's, Analog or F&SF in the past year.

I'm with Andreas, I don't trust GR to keep short story info in their database. And his blog is a fun read (tho I have no idea what the title means :)

I've only had a couple get lost since 2007 & I've got almost 2700 books & 1700 reviews listed now. I've never lost anything for long & it's easy enough to back up, so it's good enough for me. I've had worse results with Amazon & B&N.

The worst thing about reviews off site is they're not easily accessed & compared. While I review each book I read & do occasionally refer to them, I primarily review for my friends here & others that might want to read the same books & they do the same for me. There are so many books to read that I hate wasting time trying ones I don't think I'll enjoy. The GR community with their overall ratings & reviews makes picking out a good book far easier & more efficient rather than hunting & clicking all over the web. Safer, too.

G33z3r wrote: "���ß�ɴDZ���"
"Shredding machine" - back in the 80s we had a German fanzine dedicated to reviewing SF&F books with some 200-300 copies each month. It died somewhere in the 90s. The title brought back good old memories :)

Coming back from this little excursion about GR policies, I'd like to talk about the story, I just read it.

I loved the notion of A.I. urge to go "sleeping" to maintain its neural network. Well done idea! Also the interferences between different emulation targets where you never knew if Paul's undiplomatic correctness would win or the machine's care for Mildred. Introduced in a calmer scenario, it works perfectly in the action part.

And then the last line. Boy, I should have seen that coming. But I didn't, and the leading path towards it was masterfully woven.

One random idea: the android's "name" starts with BRKC which I associate with Berkshire Hathaway stocks (cf Warren Buffett); they probably had to introduce somewhere in this near future scenario yet another baby stock after BRK-A and BRK-B called "BRK-C"...

Review on my blog.