Skip to content

Piero Bosio Social Web Site Personale Logo Fediverso

Social Forum federato con il resto del mondo. Non contano le istanze, contano le persone
  1. Home
  2. Categories
  3. Uncategorized
  4. #WritersCoffeeClub Nov 16, How much work goes into naming your characters?

#WritersCoffeeClub Nov 16, How much work goes into naming your characters?

Uncategorized
1 1 0
Log in to reply

Feed RSS
#WritersCoffeeClub Nov 16, How much work goes into naming your characters?

Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
@pierobosio@soc.bosio.info
Post suggeriti
  • cstross@wandering.shopundefined

    #WritersCoffeeClub 11/21.

    Uncategorized writerscoffeeclub
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    0 Views
    cstross@wandering.shopundefined
    #WritersCoffeeClub 11/21. What are some preconceptions about writers you'd like to see challenged?Almost every depiction of a writer in TV or film is grotesquely wrong, starting with: they're all rich! Your average working novelist in the UK earns less than £5000 a year. We don't live in castles, own helicopters, and dictate languidly to our amanuensis while swigging champagne by the infinity pool, we mostly have side hustles as Amazon delivery drivers or (if we're lucky) software devs.
  • cstross@wandering.shopundefined

    #WritersCoffeeClub Nov 12th.

    Uncategorized writerscoffeeclub
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2 Views
    cppguy@infosec.spaceundefined
    @SteveClough @cstross I write nothing more creative than documentation for the software I produce, but people misunderstand that, too.The experience of people misunderstanding my docs, or simply failing to read them, was one of the things that turned me away from evangelicalism. (I bet you didn't see that coming.) I wasn't using parables to hint at ineffable spiritual truths in the face of religious persecution: I was just explaining how software worked, how to see its current state, and how to configure and maintain systems. People who were paid to read and understand this material would not or could not do so: their repeated questions made it obvious. Within a very few years, instead of reading TFM, people developed folk stories of commands they could type that usually did something that could be mistaken for success. They veered constantly off-course, and I kept having to drag them back. They consulted each other, rather than the docs, and developed their own mythology about how the software worked. They intuitively felt they knew the software better than I did, because my approach to problem-solving was careful and methodical but they knew a golden shortcut.If concrete, human-level explanations, written out literally, landed so badly, there's no chance that people will have remembered the figurative and unfathomable teachings of Jesus seventy years after his death, written them down accurately and fully, and built from them a useful picture of worlds seen and unseen and the will of God. I'm sorry; it just doesn't ring true.
  • cstross@wandering.shopundefined

    #WritersCoffeeClub Have you ever included real-world disproven science in a work?'nFor sure!'nI write SF/F and try to make the ideas crunchy.

    Uncategorized writerscoffeeclub
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    5 Views
    cstross@wandering.shopundefined
    #WritersCoffeeClub Have you ever included real-world disproven science in a work?For sure!I write SF/F and try to make the ideas crunchy. So I probably have written stuff that relied on subsequently-disproven science, *or* used the disproven stuff anyway because I like to play what-if games with the implications of ideas: "yes, but WHAT IF phlogiston theory was true? What would be the implications for stochiometry? Or steam engines and heavier-than-air flight?"
  • reinderdijkhuis@mastodon.artundefined

    Interesting question from: #WritersCoffeeClub day 17: Should modern writers worry about proving their work is not generated by an LLM

    Uncategorized writerscoffeeclub
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    7 Views
    reinderdijkhuis@mastodon.artundefined
    Interesting question from: #WritersCoffeeClub day 17: Should modern writers worry about proving their work is not generated by an LLM?My answer: Only if their writing is vacuous. As @kagan writes, the "tells" of AI "writing" are a moving target, but vacuity is still a strong indicator that something is probably written by AI, and if not, that it's almost certainly slop and not worth your time regardless. Just don't write slop, or if you do, don't publish it.