I agree, distracting... but take that with a grain of salt -- I'm a character minimalist. If I'd written LOTR, the ring wraiths would have found the Shire in chapter 2 and laid waste to it for no other reason than to get rid of unneeded characters.
Anyway, you probably recall my opinion: it's tough to have a character joke around while they're dying in a chapter one.
Q: Why is a super smart AI unworkable?
If he's that good a cadet, it doesn't matter... he'll be allowed into the funeral. Luke Skywalker snuck into all sorts of high profile situations and no one ever stopped him to ask if he had an invite.
This change means you needs less supporting royalty on Joseph's side (He didn't get much mileage out tof them in the ending anyway)
It makes it (diplomatically) easier to keep Joseph in prison
So... two wins right htere
not mentioned is the narration style.
In 3rd omniscient, go ahead... fire away!
But in 3rd limited, it's a little intrusive. Other than resorting to that moment the character looks in a mirror, directly narrating their looks is a step away from the narrator's "home" position. Should be used sparingly.
Compare to a first person limited: "I walked through the front door and my partner looked into my beautiful brown eyes and said, 'hi'". This is weird in a limited POV. THe temptation in 3rd limited is to go ahead and do this because it's easy - no pronoun change. Yet, it's just as much of a shift in gears to omniscient.
I mention all this because ITMG tends to lean to limited. It might be pertinent to your question
I'm telling President Trump you're making a tactical nuclear weapon in there
Why oh why??
amy s wrote:Wisewatch.
Try spelling it lenz. Makes it more brand name.
The list of names I gave are the generic ones. The brands are unlikely to be needed.
Ohhhh wise watch is a play on smart phone. I was wondering about the strange combination of words. X.x
Consider... in a decade the yeh smart phone might be gone if all phones are smart. "Camera"has already undergone this shift. No one says"digital camera" or DSLR anymore. In reverse, you say analog camera to refer to a non smart camera. Phones will eventually follow this pattern. If you're doing this just for world building ignore this consideration
Now, repeat after me: Not all characters have to die dead and savagely!
I whole hearetedly agree.
At least one character should find 1000 ways to die (Marsha)
Some characters should cheat death and get the reader's hopes up only to die anyway. Preferably at some inconvenient time for the remainder of the cast
Some characters (Inga) need to find a fate worse than death
Some characters (K-j-) need to be so amazing even Amy and Black John can worship him
hah.... not sure how useful that feedback is seeing as I didn't still to one answer.
Having a personal AI that always responds on the party line keeps things deliciously interesting. It also makes it more awkward to scour the local maps database for feminine hygene products when in mixed company. I approve!
Any thoughts about the contacts vs. swatches?
Why not both? I have contacts, wrist devices, glasses, hair dongles, tiaras, shoes, ocular implants, and I'm sure I'll have five or six more by the end of this draft. Or are you saying that there's going to be a massive technological convergence in the future?
I'm leaning toward swatches, since they're an all-in-one device (video in/out and audio in/out). I could potentially add 3D video to the swatches. I used to have that, but thought it was silly because simple arm movements would throw off the image, but maybe that's not such a big deal, or I could claim software adjusts to hold the picture steady. Requires explaining.
How's about "watch". Of the category of watch could be watches by different companies such as the Swatch, the Galaxiwatch and the Pepsi-watch. It sounds like you're trying to name all the devices under one trademark, which would be uncommon for a free trade society (you wouldn't want a communications monopoly - that could get ugly).
Currently, I use 3D for a holo movie, dining table centerpieces, and the display table in the War Room. In each case, there is an underlying projector, so contacts struck me as unnecessary so far.
Ok, then you should nix the contacts. A simpler backdrop allows you a more complex foreground of the descent into possible madness. Take a page out of Janet's book: sometimes a windmill really is just a random here-to-fore unimportant windmill. This puts the spotlight on the characters rather than the tech
Speaking of nixing tech, did Voyager ever have any holodecks?
That said, the only real limitation to contact lenses is audio out because of the vibrations against the eyeball. Any ideas on how best to address that? I could have the contacts transmit audio out digitally to a wireless speaker mounted on the head. Meh.
Hmm this is a legitimate problem. Even numbing the eye, the vibration would still cause vision fluctuation. I also bet you'd get a lot of retinal detachment cases because that pesky thing can come loose for much less provocation.
option a) audio comes from the nearest loudspeaker == audio party line
(Note: This is what I currently use. When Laurie is in the taxi, she has full audio (via the taxi's speakers). The moment she leaves the taxi, she's down to video with subtitles and/or texting. She could speak after that, but everyone around would hear her side of the conversation.)
option b) contacts paired with ear buds
option c) go old school and have flickering Star Wars style holograms. Have people connect via protocol droids instead of hald-held technology (btw why oh why do Star Wars droids need to speak to each other? Don't they come equipeed with Wifi?)
I decided to have them outlawed by the Geneva convention as weapons otherwise they compete with the story for attention.I'd recommend a similar approach in yours - once you get them into combat it's hard to tame them
You omitted some variables:
a) The AI may have given inaccurate numbers due to conditions that weren't present at the time of statement. By the time the AI tried to correct the estimate, Apollo was unconscious. For example, Jack (DoughBoy Red Shirt #15) may have secreted a small can of air into the room. Or the ship was struck by a chunk of debris that caused the size of the hole to change (hopefully smaller!)
b) The AI may be loopy like some of the other AIs
c) Stop frying your head. It is not a Chicken McNugget
Hmm. He has X amount of time left. Provided that air loss continues at a constant rate and that no loose objects (or people) plug the hole and restrict the air loss. The AI made a prediction based on the information it had. The prediction was not mathematical certanity but a guess based on information the AI had at the time (eg: what if one occupant died earlier than expected leaving more air for the others?)
I mean if during a drive to Vancouver (ew!), my AI predicted my fuel would run out in four minutes but it lasted eight, I'd think it was off by fifty percent due to reasons outside its control (temperature, expansion of the pipes, bad sensors, squirrels in the gas tank). The ratio is too low to be a miracle. When I reach my destination, I'll hardly emerge a born-again Christian.
if you want a miracle-in-doubt I recommend you give it a really long time. Like four hours. They get rescued. The leak is still there. The ship's oxygen tanks are empty as the AI said. It's clear the AI's calculation of death -- no matter how affected by outside factors -- is valid
Congratulations. Writing "the end" is a great feeling. Here's to many more.
No field day.
Writing a story about someone who's actively trying *not* to take action is difficult. One of my mains (the amazing [K a j o]) falls into that category. I basically surrounded him in people he grows to like and slowly take them away from him as a penalty for inaction until finally he's spurred to move. At the end of his book one, in the final chapter, he's finally like "okay fine, I'll get up and do something" -- the end.
This is a tough structure to write... after all why should the reader care about my MC if he can't be bothered to lift a finger for himself? We tend to want to read about someone motivated. If they aren't motivated, the story has to do backflips to keep us tagging along. Samuel Beckett had this ability. And Robertson Davies.
I know this doesn't help. Just some thoughts.
These trips... they're voluntary?
I say get to the lovey dovey
Define "lost'
Perhaps a "blaster" with multiple settings?
1. I forgot the sunscreen
2. I'm wearing a red shirt
3. BBQ
4. Liquify
5. Reactors look balmy compared to this
6. Mushroom cloud
7. The sun is jealous
8. Sh*t, I just melted the planet
9. We don't need no stinkin' solar system
10. Big bang
If they don't have distilled spirits, try wine? They had plenty of that well before JC
You have the makings of a nice 3 pillar story here, should Maya side against both the Empire and the Scofflaws.
If you went with the previous concept, you could put one or two nanoids in each bullet - don't need thousands if they're going to start replicating once released.
It would be a lot of work for a nanoid to bind free-floating air molecules into anything useful. You're looking to break some pretty tight covalent bonds just to get use out of a water molecule. It's best you keep them working at the molecular level than the atomic unless they have infinite power handy
Most would suggest carbon. It's available in abundance from cells, allowing for replication. Probably need a bit of silicon (not sure where theyd get that) and iron (easily obtained from the bloodstream). In my story, they latch onto the mitochondria for juice
Perhaps the laser struck a neural implant?
There are more missing chunks, which I'll try to hit when I reach that point. You're possibly experiencing the fear of overexplaining. It's a legitimate concern.
