Rebutting science fiction.

That's the CHI rebuttle off.
plus got some experiments done ( 4 people - nice results so far )

nice thing about technology on BBC ...
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140110-technologys-greatest-myth


Mentions

Lecturing in late 1968, the American sociologist Harvey Sacks addressed one of the central failures of technocratic dreams. We have always hoped, Sacks argued, that “if only we introduced some fantastic new communication machine the world will be transformed.” Instead, though, even our best and brightest devices must be accommodated within existing practices and assumptions in a “world that has whatever organisation it already has.”


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781444328301

Why do we have technocratic dreams ? Why not polticratic dreams or sococratic dreams.

I wonder why we have science-fiction, but not the Law-fiction (fiction based on speculation on what the world would be like in the future with diffrent systems of laws ) Social-fiction ( people who speculate on what the world would be like in the future with different systems of social organization ).  Art-fiction ( people who speculate on what the world would be like in the future with diffrent types of art ) or Author-fiction ( people who speculate on what the world would be like in the future with diffrent systems types of litrature ). So why science fiction ?