Talk: Real

I think this has been discussed elsewhere, but Real doesn't seem like a drug to me. The metaphor is one of drugs, but the Real itself is more of a nanotechnological version of a virtual-reality headset or a holodeck. I think it fits in Technology better than Drugs.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 03:14, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

I've also long had trouble accepting it as a drug. It's clearly not pharmacological in nature. But its consumers behave exactly the same as drug addicts and its producers behave exactly the same as drug dealers. I think I'd put it in both categories rather than move it from one to the other. Turtle Fan (talk) 06:34, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with both. TR (talk) 14:29, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

I think Turtledove is invoking Clarke's third law to illustrate just how much more advanced the Chinese are over the Americans. Cating in both is fine with me. ML4E (talk) 15:56, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

I also thought of the Third Law. Turtle Fan (talk) 16:14, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

Another far-future metaphor this story brings to mind is The Omega Glory.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 18:37, July 18, 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps. The thought occurred to me yesterday that, if you were to travel back in time to a generation that got its medications through poultices and herbal teas and such, they might struggle to wrap their heads around modern pharmaceuticals belonging in the same category. In the future, nanotechnology as a drug might be taken for granted in just the same way. Turtle Fan (talk) 19:06, July 19, 2019 (UTC)