In the books, Murderbot is aggressively no gendered. It gets upset at any suggestions that it has sex characteristics. That was enough for me to form a mental image of androgyny.
I mean, it's fine. They had to go with someone, and that someone was going to have a body, it's just different from what I pictured.
I'm enjoying it. Some of the decisions are a little odd. The thing that's most distracting to me is that, in my head, Murderbot appears much more androgynous. That might have been hard to pull off, but Skarsgard is definitely male (even without genitalia). Some of the other characters are goofier than in the books, but I kind of understand the choice.
I hope the show gets people to read the books, but the show is entertaining.
The show is good, the books are fantastic!
I know it's a month old, but I just saw this post and wanted to add some comments.
First of all, I agree with the recommendation on Leckie, especially the Imperial Radch series. It's space opera - not funny like Murderbot - but it's a pretty interesting take on an artificial consciousness.
Second, Wells has written other stuff besides Murderbot that's good. I'm also more of a hard SF reader, but I did enjoy her Tales of the Raksura series, which is straight up fantasy, with people who can turn into dragon-like things.
Third, John Scalzi is also really good at clever/witty dialog. Some of his stuff is more serious, but he's got a few that are both funny and moving. Maybe check out Redshirts, which is kind of the Star Trek situation, from the point of view of the away team members who tend to die while the main characters always survive. Very silly concept, done very well.
I read kind of a ridiculous amount of SF. If you want any recommendations for hard SF, or anything else in the genre, I'd be happy to give my thoughts.
This is a great guide. The only quibble I have with it is the part about choosing an instance. There's one aspect where it does matter: not every instance federates with every other. It's good to be aware of any significant defederation vs what you care about when selecting an instance.
Isn't that just when this domain was created? But I can believe it was in that time frame. I would have guessed earlier - he has a book version in the early 2000s, and I thought the web/online stuff was a few years prior. Maybe not though.
As I recall, it's from the early or mid 1990s.
This is really, really old. Like, I used to get it as a regular email. I'm guessing it was early to mid 90s?
People have those things in spectrums, not all or nothing. You have to have at least some of all of them, but I'd argue that mediocre competency with really good communication and accountability is a better combination that really good competency with one of the others being mediocre.
I'm halfway through scrolling this long thread, and this is the first comment I've seen that isn't overly cynical. It's also correct.
I've been working for 38 years, and I've been someone who makes promotion decisions for 15 of them. The third one is helpful, not essential, but the others are super important. The people who rise to leadership positions aren't necessarily the top technical people, they're the ones who do those things with a good attitude.
The other thing I'd add is that they're people who are able to see the big picture and how the details relate to it, which is part of strategic thinking.
Outdoor cats have a shorter average life span in cities, too. One big cause is cars. Also, it's worth noting that house cats are essentially an invasive species and do a lot of damage to bird populations.
It's pretty widely recommended to keep cats indoors.
Which did you feel was the clunker?