Book: Protector

[phantom000]

https://sfdebris.com/videos/special/protector.php

I recently got into Larry Niven's Known Space, it's not a series, more like a bunch of different stories that all take place in the same setting.

My favorite is Ringworld which is great on some many levels. Protector is more 'meh.' Niven is not a bad writer, the story was not a chore to get through but I wasn't exactly hooked on it like I was with his other works like Crashlander.

I guess it is just Niven growing as a writer since the other works were written later.

[AllanO]

I have not disliked what Niven I have read, although I do find the sort of concept over character technocratic hard SF he writes somewhat limited.

In terms of the concepts discussed I think his idea of being so intelligent you lose free will loses sight of an important aspect of knowledge. In reality no matter how smart you are some stuff is unknowable in principle because essentially of self reference, no matter how smart you are that extra smarts will make it impossible for you to predict the consequence of that smarts. The most telling example to me of this is the halting problem in mathematics/computer science, there can be no general algorithm to say whether any computer (anything instantiating an algorithm) will halt or not, because "any algorithm" includes all the algorithms that incorporate the general algorithm to solve the halting problem and so whatever the general algorithm predicts the candidate algorithm can do the opposite of and the general algorithm can never surpass that because to do so it would have to surpass itself. So even a lone super intelligence would be faced with unknowns about what its own behaviour would be, if there were more than one super intelligence they would be unable to predict each others behaviour in cases where they are competing etc.

Given this I am relatively sure the fact that we can't foresee the consequences of our actions or which one is the best bet, best compromise of various issues etc., is not merely some practical limitation of our current level of insight, but in some cases there are things that just can not be known (in advance at least) given the relationship of what we want to know to our process of finding that out etc.

[Darth Wedgius]

Niven is probably my favorite science fiction author, and Protector maybe my favorite of his novels (though I like some of his short stories more). This could have been a novel I bought a review of, if I'd thought of it.

Niven does nice "playgrounds for the mind," ideas that are thought out, even to the odd little corners.
For example, teleportation has been written about many times, but he gave us flash crowds -- the idea that if news hits about something happening somewhere and 0.001 of the population wants to go see for themselves, teleportation lets that spot get very crowded, very quickly. He also used teleportation as an idea for getting fresh water out of salt water (fill a container most of the way with salt water; teleport air out of the top, and the resulting low pressure causes the water to flash into vapor, which can be then be teleported out and condensed into fresh water).

When he puts ideas to clever uses, I can't help but go "Hmmm" a few times, myself. He created a "stasis field" which covers a volume in an impermeable, reflective barrier, on the inside of which time can pass far more slowly. It's occurred to me that it might allow for FTL signalling (if it's perfectly rigid, pushing one side will transmit the impulse instantaneously to the oppose side, and since it can be any length I don't think Lorentz contraction would void that).

IIRC, the Pak protectors were supposed to show that being intelligent doesn't mean you'll necessarily choose intelligent goals. That may sound contradictory, but haven't we all know that really intelligent person who somehow manages to screw his life up in a big way? They're in love, or they're hooked on something, or they got too used to things being easy in school and never learned that brains aren't everything you need later in life. Or people who get A Cause and will use confirmation bias to whatever degree needed (not a dig at anyone -- people can do this for any cause).

He said he tried to write aliens who thought as well as humans, but not like humans. I was going to write here about the Kzin (where I think Niven does a decent but not spectacular job of this) and the Pierson's Puppeteers (where I think Niven does a much better job), but SFDebris may be leading up to Ringworld, and he may delve into those then, because they are important to the plot.

[Ikiry0]

A thin with the Pak, as much as I read it, is that they can't stand even the smallest RISK of harm. If a non-Pack species has a 99% chance to be of great benefit to the Pak and a 1% chance to harm it, they'll wipe it out every time. Which makes them stagnant in pretty much every way except technology, going about the same path and unable to actually take a risk that might do good things because of the chance it could also go badly.

Which makes me a little curious about how the Pak Protectors would actually act in a situation where they were unambiguously in a losing situation, no chance to win. Would it finally force them to try 'The odds of surrender are better than the odds of fighting'...though even then, you could never Trust them, even if they did surrender. You still exist and are still a potential threat, with no reason for them to keep their word.

Now, I might be talking nonsense but they always struck me as both incredibly intelligent and also a species that would mess up the Prisoner's Dilemma every single time.

[hammerofglass]

So if this is in the same universe as Known Space, what were the Protectors doing during the Kzinti invasions?

[Fianna]

Niven seems to be stacking the deck, since the super-intelligence and logicality comes packaged with an instinctual single-mindedness.

[Darth Wedgius]

So if this is in the same universe as Known Space, what were the Protectors doing during the Kzinti invasions?

I think Niven leaves that hanging. The human protectors grown from the Home colony were off fighting the Pak scouts for a while, but after that.. Anyway, there's no trace of either of those sets of protectors after this novel, unless I missed a reference in a later book. Maybe the annihilated each other.

[Riedquat]

IIRC, the Pak protectors were supposed to show that being intelligent doesn't mean you'll necessarily choose intelligent goals. That may sound contradictory, but haven't we all know that really intelligent person who somehow manages to screw his life up in a big way? They're in love, or they're hooked on something, or they got too used to things being easy in school and never learned that brains aren't everything you need later in life. Or people who get A Cause and will use confirmation bias to whatever degree needed (not a dig at anyone -- people can do this for any cause).

This feels like something I've often thought of, and where I think quite a few people actually miss a point when it comes to What Must Be Done (about anything, mundane or big goal or whatever). They appear to believe that you can rationally work out what the correct decisions are and should therefore go with them, but doing so always requires that less "rational" motivation. Without that there's no real incentive to do anything, even survive. The Protectors sound like an extreme example of that but within that context a very plausible one.

Intelligence is a goal to help get us what emotional and instinctive drives tell us is worth having (and I'm not quite sure that you can separate those two either - the Pak could well be emotional, just with only the one single emotion about family). IMO we're making a complete and utter mess of things by getting that entirely backwards.

[Artabax]

Alien species has an different breeding cycle is an excellent Sci-Fi premise. Making them into our own ancestors makes them Eldritch Abominations.

It is as depressing as Doctor Who FINALE the Timeless Children
SPOILER

Time-Lords earnt their Power by vivisecting an Eldritch Abomination and sucking some Power out. This would have been an interesting premise but then Brussels Broadcasting Corporation fatwahed that Doctor herself personally is the Abomination.

[Darth Wedgius]

IIRC, the Pak protectors were supposed to show that being intelligent doesn't mean you'll necessarily choose intelligent goals. That may sound contradictory, but haven't we all know that really intelligent person who somehow manages to screw his life up in a big way? They're in love, or they're hooked on something, or they got too used to things being easy in school and never learned that brains aren't everything you need later in life. Or people who get A Cause and will use confirmation bias to whatever degree needed (not a dig at anyone -- people can do this for any cause).

This feels like something I've often thought of, and where I think quite a few people actually miss a point when it comes to What Must Be Done (about anything, mundane or big goal or whatever). They appear to believe that you can rationally work out what the correct decisions are and should therefore go with them, but doing so always requires that less "rational" motivation. Without that there's no real incentive to do anything, even survive. The Protectors sound like an extreme example of that but within that context a very plausible one.

Intelligence is a goal to help get us what emotional and instinctive drives tell us is worth having (and I'm not quite sure that you can separate those two either - the Pak could well be emotional, just with only the one single emotion about family). IMO we're making a complete and utter mess of things by getting that entirely backwards.

Yes, yes, exactly that. Niven said, "“Intelligence is just a tool to be used toward a goal, and goals are not always chosen intelligently." I'd go further and say that one's ultimate goals are never chosen intelligently, since those are based on instincts or feelings, but I'm in a minority in that regard.