Thoughtball

Thoughtball – a drug (for story purposes, probably a drug/nanomachine combination of some sort to suit the story) that allows people to hallucinate a ball. They think of all the things, thoughts, memories, loves, pains, betrayals, hopes, hopeless feelings, that they want to get out of their mind, and place it inside this mental ball. After a while, the Thoughtball has removed either the memory itself or the feeling associated with the memory – depending on how the user wants the memory modified. For actually making this a story, after it does what it does, the nanomachines recollect, possibly under the tongue after a night of sleep, in a small ball that’s thrown out… usually.

Inspiration for this idea: Two inspirations, both from Japanese anime shows. First is from Bakuman, one of the first ideas for a manga the main characters had, a one-shot called “Money and Intelligence” – it is about buying and selling minds.

The second is from Code: Geass, the drug refrain. In the show it’s a drug that the elevens (the name for Japanese people in the show, since Japan is “Area 11”) take that lets people relive old memories.

As for the story itself:

The Thoughtball, an illegal substance that law enforcement mostly overlooks casual use of. And then people start turning up dead, prompting the hero of our story, a law-enforcement official, to look into it.

Thoughtball was mostly overlooked for a couple of reason, regardless of its legality. First, everyone used it. The ability to forget the worst of the worst that had happened to an individual is a powerful thing. The medical applications alone for victims of crimes and war were almost overwhelming when it came to public sentiment for legalizing the drug.

But it couldn’t be legalized, the USA couldn’t allow that. Both parties were against legalization, though you’d be hard-pressed to find a politician that hadn’t used it. But each party kept it illegal. One party had claimed that forgetting what had happened to a person was just another symptom of a drug-riddled nation, unable to stand on its own two feet. They claimed that a person was the sum of their experiences, and to forget any, regardless of the horror, was depriving them of humanity. They took the so-called moral approach, regardless of the hoards of people that claimed it was their right to forget the terrors that had happened to them.

The other party couldn’t allow it for a different reason. Although they claimed to sympathize, they claimed it would ruin the criminal justice system. Imagine if a witness could forget a crime they had seen, how would someone ever get convicted again? As terrible an event a person may have been put through, if they couldn’t repeat their testimony years later, for the Thoughtball had removed it, then how could they in good faith let any conviction based on eyewitnesses alone stand? They claimed it was a sad conundrum. They also pointed out that criminals with access could force eyewitnesses to take it and recant any testimony – it’d be far cleaner than killing the person.

With both parties in opposition, yet its use still widespread, it became an unenforced substance. Nobody talked about it, but everyone knew about it.

And then came the deaths, mentioned before. Thoughtball had another use. It could also be used to transfer memories. A black market appeared for those who would buy the memories and feelings of others. You had the downtrodden buying memories of those who were rich and famous and had good-looking spouses. You had people reliving in their minds things that they could never have dreamed of before. But not everyone got what they were looking for. Those who were depressed both bought and sold memories as well. Those in sorrow would pay for the feeling of someone else’s happiness.

And some sold their sorrow to a certain group, which paid well for something that it was assumed no one would purchase. It was an addiction those most vulnerable in society were most susceptible to.

The group sold “happiness” at a low rate, raking in the money. Then they’d move on to another area, as over the next few days the rate of suicide in a particular city would jump. Selling sorrowful, painful, depressive memories under the guise of “happiness” to those already depressed served as a cruel way to make a quick buck and also make sure the customer doesn’t come around later to ask about their product.

At first the connection isn’t seen, but the hero comes across it when investigating a certain suicide, something about it hadn’t added up. Even with the sudden jumps in death the police weren’t apt to look into it, as each death was legitimately suicide.

Rumors of tainted Thoughtball were around, but they stayed rumors.

After all this setup there’s still a question of how the plot progresses, but we can see from here on it’s a matter of circumstances and investigations that our hero will have to go through until finally blowing the lid off the Thoughtball sorrow scheme.

Once public people stop using it casually, and law enforcement starts taking its illegal status seriously.

That would be too easy an ending, so…

Does everyone just pop a new Thoughtball and forget it all?

Does our main character, even though all he’s discovered about the possible abuses, still decide to succumb to the temptation to forget his own troubles, both past and recent?

Does anything actually change, or is it just another example of a useful product that ends up being abused by those who would take advantage of others anyways?

Should any of the questions above be meaningful in the story and actually be answered, or should they all just hang in the air as the audience ponders what they would do in such a world?

Posted in Short Stories | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ABC and D outnumbers E

Ars Technica has an origin of life post.

But it’s strange. I read it so very many times. Regardless of faith, science experiments are fascinating in general. This one was not.

All I can see is the following summary of this article:

RNA which is broken, A, B, and C are in a pot together. A and B can only repair other molecules (including each other), but C can self-repair. Note that C can instead cooperate and repair along with others, or its own self (individual, not just other C’s). This has to do with replication. Let us say that all cooperative results are D. Let us say that all self-fixes are E.

The results? D outnumbered E after [time]. Continuing to add randomly broken RNA did add some E, but D proved superior. Thus the cooperative RNA outperformed the selfish…

However.

You don’t have to run a test to see that. Because as long as C can assist and not always be selfish, shouldn’t the results always favor community effort when in a non-segregated environment? So I don’t understand why this article thinks anything here is special… or, frankly, what this really has to do with origin-of-life. They are inferring that from simple chemical processes and very basic math, there is a basis in nature for community spirit outdoes selfishness. A scientist would say that’s a leap of faith. I call it a headline-grabber.

Now, I’m all for working together in harmony. There’s a great religious song about it. But it doesn’t take a religious person to point out the results of a simple chemical and math equation. It does take a religious person (of a certain kind of faith…) to extrapolate that into how genes are preserved in a population over time. While I may disagree with those of the general Atheist persuasion, I do appreciate a good intellectual discussion.

Posted in Writing | Leave a comment

People names

I’m always trying to think of unconventional names. I have a rather strong background in Japanese entertainment (that’s code for watching too many cartoons in the past), and so many of the names I use in my works are either influenced by Japanese language and their word construction, or are simply pure Japanese to begin with.

I’m thinking of a new story and need to come up with a character name, as his name will be one of the points in the book the rest of the characters will point at, question, etc. He’ll often introduce himself by a self-made title instead, always some reversal of an idiom… or not. Whatever works.

But this thought of names reminded me of how names are treated, how other cultures treat them, how I treat them, how I’ve used them in my own works, and how their associations work.

So, to generally address some of these issues and how they work:

  1. Names are treated as identifiers for individuals, though names are not unique.
    • A first name is an identifier of the person themselves, in most circumstances.
    • Other parts of the name can be to pass on family names that aren’t part of the family identifier, thus the middle name(s).
    • A last name identifies the family the individual comes from, usually the father’s since most societies defer to male lineage.
  2. Cultures place importance on which part of the name to use in various situations
    • Americans use the first name in most situations when dealing with peers. The middle name isn’t used outside of immediate family, and even then rather rarely. The last name is used when addressing superiors, or as a sign of respect. It isn’t typically used when speaking with family members or workmates.
    • The Japanese always use the last/family name of a person they are not an immediate relative of, and usually only use a first name with people they become close to. Before using a first name, permissions is also sometimes asked/given, it can be considered rude to use it otherwise. An interesting example is that the boyfriend/girlfriend relationship can sometimes be inferred when someone calls a person of the opposite gender their first name, due to the intimacy a first name denotes. In American culture it’s polite to call a school-age person of the opposite gender by their first name.
    • And let’s not forget given and mature names! I don’t have as much experience with this, but it is seen in some parts of Chinese culture, though I usually see it in historical stuff. More research is required. But the basic gist: a person is given a name at birth. After they have matured, their mentor/teacher/parent figure recognizes their maturity, and adds a special character to their name, and now they have a new “adult” name, to distinguish them from their childhood name. Certainly names are important, if they can change completely as a sign of honor.
  3. How I’ve seen them used, and how I’ve used them.
    • This got me thinking, “What’s mother’s name?” Of course I can answer that off the top of my head, but think about it for a moment: I’m willing to bet “Mom’s name is mom… oh, and her given name, of course,” – or that children are quite used to only ever using their parents’ titles, and would have to spend a very short moment, short but still existent, moment to recall a parent’s actual, given, full name, as well as a mother’s maiden name. It’s just not used outside of a certain context.
    • I’m reminded of one of my friends, who has had issues with his parents for as long as I can recall. But the thing that sticks out is how he started referring to his parents after a while, and after a while it truly seemed like they now had this particular title in his mind, he didn’t have to consciously refer to them as this anymore, it was just their title. That title? “Parental units.” Parental unit number one was probably the mother, parental unit number two was probably my friend’s father. I even recall him asking a question about how my parental units were doing! This behavior still fascinates me, especially when dealing with people names and titles. And if you’ve grown up in a troubled household while feeding your mind with cyberpunk books and games, sci-fi worlds, dystopian futures, you may just refer to those beings that happened to spawn you as android-like units as well. This I don’t recommend, but it’s certainly interesting to take note of when developing realistic characters.
    • I personally grew up with much family around, aunts and uncles of both the blood and unrelated but close kind, and so I’ve spent far more of my life referring to people by their first name than last. Interestingly, being in a religious environment makes you automatically refer to other congregation members by their last name, but I’ve still noticed that we tend to move on to first names when a closer friendship is established. It still depends on local customs. But for me, in my mind, referring to someone by their first name is the norm. In addition to that, I prefer to be called by my first name in all situations. However, this is quite against customs in, well, most of history, most of the world. I actually have to make a conscious effort to remember to use only last names in most situations.
    • And the last item is where I’ve gone and let it influence my writing. I’ve introduced about every single character in my Together with Silver, or The Lupine books (as I’ve started to think of them) by their first name. In fact, it’s actually part of the story that suddenly, characters who have known each other for decades suddenly find out their best friends’ last names, which play a part in the plot. In fact, some of them don’t have anything but a first name, and use the ancient way of referring to themselves, First Name, son/daughter of [parent name]. Now though this may fit with the time period, it’s still something to keep in mind, to play with, and to recall when writing.

Names are rather important. How titles influence them, how age influences them in all it’s various ways, how experiences influence how people use names and titles, all play a part in the simple question of: so what’s this character’s name?

I haven’t answered that question yet. But it’ll come. And regardless of the name itself, how it’s used will be vital to the story.

Posted in Self, Writing | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

775k

One of my favorite authors wrote very, very long books. I’ve read the few that have been translated into English (by fans, only one book has ever officially been translated, the rest are all stuck in their original language, and they were all written decades ago – to appease those who may want to claim copyright issues, there are extenuating circumstances in this case). Each took a few weeks, even with constantly reading them throughout each day at every possible opportunity. I’ve often told people that they are all around 40 chapters with up to 40,000 words per chapter. Quite long, but still quite good.

And they’ve been in 40 separate word documents. Until now. Now, I know I could have done this earlier, but to put 40 word documents into a single document all at once seemed like a hassle. I’m sure there are some easier ways to do it, but I couldn’t be bothered to search more than a few sites before giving up. And now, when working on TLC, I realized how: Import into project.

Turns out all I had to do was create a new Scrivner project, import docs, Scrivner automatically converted them all into RTF, and then compiled them all into a new MS Word doc, which I then sent to a Kindle Converter… and voila! Simple, easy conversion, to be read at my leisure. Nevermind that a single book is longer than all 66 books of the Bible. It’s riveting! It’s formatted wrong in places! It’s got links to web pages that explain the terms used in places! But it’s fantastic nonetheless.

But considering how long it takes to read other things, and how many other things in life take up time, I do wonder when I’ll ever decide to read this work again. Probably before the next major book… as this particular work has had a large influence on what I’ve already written, and contributed to how I wrote all that I have.

Still, 775,000 words is a lot. But joyous nonetheless.

Posted in Writing | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The one food you can’t live without

I love pizza. It’s probably my favorite food. I also love those sweet cherries. They are amazing with ice cream.

Chocolate. Oh la la.

And lets not forget French Vanilla, with that hint of something “more” that plain vanilla doesn’t have.

And then of course we have the other pleasantries. Potato chips (not corn chips, not tortilla chips, POTATO chips), salty goodness.

Speaking of salty goodness, the Japanese introduced me to short-grain rice in a bowl with plenty of soy sauce and sliced pickles on top. Salty, carby, yummy. This, from someone who never really cared for rice most of their life, mostly because it was the long-grain stuff that comes cheaply. Short-grain rice is sticky. Long-grain doesn’t stick as much. And then add in some rice vinegar and you really begin to appreciate how good rice can  actually be.

But there’s one food that I have to have once a month, without exception. Pizza is not it, even though I’d love to claim pizza as my favorite food, especially some of the really good stuff that you can only find from non-chain places. Though I definitely crave a pan-crust every so often (Pizza Hut, very, very hot, delicious), there’s one food that somehow, I know I’ve gone too long without one. My body craves one every so often, and nothing but one will appease it.

I’ve gone spells without it, weeks after the craving hits (with may hit 2-3 weeks after the last time I had one), and after another couple weeks, the feeling is unbearable.

Yes, the one food that somehow, I just can’t seem to live without, that seems to appear in my mind after too long without it, like an addition you don’t realize you have, is a greasy hamburger. Not just a hamburger – a greasy hamburger.

I love hamburgers. It’s not my favorite food, though it is one of my favorites. But it’s the one food that all of a sudden appears in my mind, not letting me go until I’ve had one. Yes, even a cheap McDonalds hamburger is acceptable, after all the qualifier isn’t a healthy hamburger, but a greasy one.

I love a lot of different foods. But for some reason, I need a hamburger every so often. That means if I had to choose between pizza and hamburgers, chocolate and hamburgers, alcohol and hamburger (that’s a choice I’d hate to make!), the hamburger is the one that’d somehow win out. Somehow, this greasy concoction of ground meat is that one food I can’t live without. Woe is me… not. Man, I love a good greasy cheesy ketchupy hamburger.

Posted in Writing | Leave a comment