Jacob Foxx's Blog, page 58

Prescient Sci-Fi Officially Launched

For the last couple years, I’ve been working with a small group to develop a new e-publishing platform for young authors in the science fiction genre. I have been very fortunate that we decided to start with my own novels but now we want to expand to help other authors as well. Which is why I am very proud and excited to announce the launch of Prescient Sci-Fi.

I currently serve as Editor of Prescient as well as the author of its first couple products. In the coming months you’ll see my blog posts appear on both this website and Prescient as well as articles from other contributors, including my good friend Paulie Spiceflow. Prescient is looking for additional contributors as well. To learn more I urge you to check out the website.

Here is the official release:

Welcome! We are very pleased and excited to launch the Prescient Sci-Fi website. Prescient is dedicated to publishing high quality science fiction from new authors. Whether it is stories about space, time travel, or genetic engineering, we want to develop and publish compelling stories that give unique new perspectives on ourselves and the world.

Science fiction has thrived in recent decades largely because technology is bringing fiction to reality at an accelerating rate. What was once considered speculative or fantastic quickly becomes reality. Science fiction is about human experiences with the fantastic, where the fantastic has its roots in natural and physical laws. Exploring the fantastic allows us to reach beyond the limitations of mainstream fiction and transport readers to incredible new places, provoke new thoughts, provide new insights, and inspire new innovations. In fact many innovators admit their work was inspired by sci-fi movies and books. Whether it is the cell phone (Star Trek), the submarine (Jules Verne’s Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea), or atomic power (H.G. Wells’ The World Set Free), the genre has impacted innovation in the real world.

Great science fiction is more than just cool gadgets, weird aliens, or sleek-looking spaceships zooming across the galaxy. It is a platform for powerful thought experiments, which can teach us things that we can’t learn by observing the world as it is today. Science fiction explores unseen possibilities, identifies challenges, gives warning, and can frighten us with our own power.

No novel demonstrates this better than the Mary Shelley’s classic Frankenstein, considered by many to be the first science fiction novel. The story of Victor Frankenstein’s creation is an allegorical tale of the perils of scientific discovery. Frankenstein’s creation, although a technological marvel of its time, would eventually destroy him. The theme persists to this day with films like The Terminator, The Matrix, and Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Science fiction can also be a voice of hope. The classic franchise Star Trek presents a future where humanity has conquered international war, famine, disease, and poverty. Starfleet is a civilization of rational, benevolent explorers seeking to acquire knowledge and spread peace and prosperity throughout the galaxy.

There are also stories of the challenges we may yet face. Jurassic Park explores the ethical challenges of genetic engineering and the resurrecting of long extinct animals. The movie Gattaca approaches the potential issue of genetic discrimination, something we may face in the future. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep made readers wonder about the limits of artificial intelligence and what it means to be human.

We can go on and on.

Prescient Sci-Fi seeks to fulfill the potential of the genre. We also seek to promote new authors with compelling new ideas and themes. Technology is reshaping everything from how we read books to how they are sold, creating new opportunities for new authors.

In the old days, it was common for authors to wait years before getting an opportunity to be published. But just as the electronic age changed the music industry, it is now transforming the publishing industry. The e-reader has provided a new efficient means of bringing books to consumers. Production costs are dropping rapidly allowing smaller publishers to compete with the big boys. You don’t need a six digit budget to develop, produce, and market a new novel. Thanks to e-readers and print-on-demand services, a book can be brought to market at a fraction of the cost.

More publishers means more opportunities for authors. Rather than submit a work to a tiny handful of prospective publishers, an author can submit works to a larger universe of publishers such as Prescient. In the past few years many authors are enjoying great success pursuing this route.

We welcome submissions for not only fiction, but also commentary and book reviews. If you are obsessed with science fiction, have plenty of opinions on popular sci-fi or science in general, and you can write, please contact us or begin submitting work for the website. You can submit your work or inquire about being a contributor at the submissions guidelines page.

Also we strongly urge you to read The Fifth World by Jacob Foxx, our first signed author. The sequel, The Fifth World: The Times That Try Men’s Souls, was released in 2013 with the third volume set to be released in 2015. Work from other authors will soon follow.

Thank you and welcome to Prescient Sci-Fi.

The post Prescient Sci-Fi Officially Launched appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Book Review: A Fire Upon the Deep, Vernor Vinge

I’ve tried to read as many sci-fi classics as possible this summer before switching to new indie titles. A few weeks ago I started A Fire Upon the Deep, Vernor Vinge’s award winning far future space adventure. It did not disappoint. It is ones of the most imaginative books I’ve read, combining a number of sci-fi elements in a thoughtful and compelling way. It was a little long and on the dry side at times, but still good read.

On a remote, primitive world called Tines a human starship crash lands. Before the voyagers can call for help they are attacked by a race of primitive dog-like creatures. Two survivors, young Johanna and Jefri, are captured. On the other side of the galaxy, Ravna notices something is happening in the galaxy. A mysterious force called the Blight is consuming entire civilizations, expanding rapidly. A godlike entity called a Power uses a human named Pham Nuwen to investigate the Blight alongside her. When the Power is killed and Ravna’s world destroyed, she comes to believe the to stopping the Blight is held within the starship marooned on the primitive world of Tines.

The world-building in A Fire Upon the Deep is impressive. Vinge created several worlds and a number of intelligent alien races. Each race has some unique and realistic details and don’t follow the usual humanoid or human-thinking aliens of other novels and movies. The incredible technologies and scenery on several planets are evidence of a future where science has brought the entire galaxy to an era of relative peace and cooperation. Humans are a small proportion of the billions upon billions of inhabitants.

The tine species is fascinating. The tines are a large dog-like species that operate as mini-collectives or packs. An individual tine is not intelligent, but a pack of four or more has an IQ equal or greater than a human. They are telepathic, combining the memories, nature, and emotions of each individual to become a collective mind. Within the pack the link is strong, making them dependent on one another. When a tine from outside the pack gets too close, its thoughts disrupt the collective, creating mind-noise.

The skoderiders are another interesting species. They are trees with mechanical appendages allowing them to communicate verbally as well as through sign language, using their fronds.

The blight is never fully explained but it seemed to be a genocidal artificial intelligence of some kind, awakened by mistake. Powers are transcendent beings, super intelligent and largely benign. Their nature is not fully explored either.

The species of Vinge’s universe fit cleanly into either the good or evil categories. There are no shades of gray. The dichotomy is similar to Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek universe. The protagonists are all wise, insightful, and always rational people who see through the fog of ignorance. The antagonists are sinister in all their ways with no redeeming qualities. It is similar to the highly-principled and wise United Federation of Planets compared to the barbaric Klingon Empire.

While the universe is creative, Vinge’s descriptive power wasn’t as amazing. The descriptions are a little thin at times forcing the reader to use a lot of his own imagination. The book has plenty of action but there were a few parts where the pace slowed. Vinge info-dumped a few times, giving some more details about the universe with no clear connection to the story. He also jumps around from ten to eleven different character perspectives.

If you are willing to put in some effort to explore Vinge’s far future universe, A Fire Upon the Deep is an excellent novel. It is a triumph of imagination. The story is plenty exciting and has some touching moments as well. Next on my to-read list are Oryx and Crake, Anathem, and Red Rising.

4 Stars!

J

The post Book Review: A Fire Upon the Deep, Vernor Vinge appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Science Fiction Without the Science

Nothing enrages nerds more than bad science in movies. In particular, films that market themselves as science fiction. The most recent culprit is Lucy. Ross Pomeroy points out the flaw in the entire premise of the film on RealClearScience. With a false premise, everything that follows in the movie is complete fantasy.

Lucy is about a young woman forced to be a drug mule for the Taiwanese mob. The container holding the illegal drug breaks in her stomach, unleashing a powerful chemical into her system. The drug greatly expands her brain use past the 10 percent of a normal brain. She gains X-Men like powers such as great strength, telekinesis, rapid learning abilities, and the ability to change hair color at will!

The movie is built on the myth that we only use 10 percent of our brain. This is a myth that has been perpetuated for decades without a bit of truth to it. Neurologists are pretty confident we use the whole damn thing.

Should people not see it because the premise is bunk? Well…it does have Scarlett Johansson. For some her charm was enough, but for most the movie was a dud. According to Rotten Tomatoes, less than half of audiences enjoyed the movie.

Do science fiction movies need good science to be successful? Nope. Despite Lucy‘s ridiculous premise it has grossed over $80 million, surpassing its $40 million production cost. There are many other costs involved with a film including advertising, marketing, post-production etc. Still, I’d guess at the very least, it will break even.

Other bad-science movies have managed to succeed as well. The Transformers franchise has earned truckloads of money despite having almost zero legitimate science in it. Three of the movies have grossed over $1 billion worldwide. US audiences soured on the last one, making it the least successful of the four, but it still managed to earn $700 million+ outside the US.

Since Transformers is based on an old cartoon and line of toys, perhaps it is unfair to expect real science in it. The audience probably doesn’t expect it either.

The same can be said for the parade of superhero movies that have made tons of money over the years. They are based on comic books after all. In many cases the creators wanted to modernize fantasy while avoiding the use of magic. Hence the X-Men gain sorcerer-like powers through mutation, not magic. The Avengers receive their powers largely from scientific experimentation and enhancement, all of it bunk.

Outside of superhero movies, Michael Bay gets the award for making anti-reality movies. Armageddon has won several online awards for having the most technical inaccuracies. In fact NASA scientists challenge new employees to identify every single scientific inaccuracy in the film as part of their initiation into the agency.

Roland Emmerich deserves second place in the “bastardizing science for cash” category. His stunners are 2012 and Day After Tomorrow. The movie 2012 is more or less a parody of the Mayan Prophecy using a bizarre geological event that rips the tectonic plates of the Earth apart. The Day After Tomorrow (horrible title aside) attempts to frighten its audience about global warming, despite the fact that no warming effect could come close to producing super-mega storms.

Was it for a good cause? No. I prefer truth over scare tactics. We are not children.

Neither film received much in the way of positive reviews from critics or audiences, yet both earned over $500 million in ticket sales. The bulk coming from foreign audiences. I guess the lesson here is foreign audiences are not as demanding when it comes to scientific realism.

Three other movies deserve attention for their ruthless slaughtering of science: The Core, The Sixth Day, and Reign of Fire.

The Core was a total disaster critically and financially. The premise involves the Earth’s core and its sudden decision to stop rotating. This then leads to a collapse of the Earth’s magnetic field and…whatever.

The Sixth Day had labs able to clone humans in mere hours as well as downloading all memories from a person by scanning their eyes. It was a flop as well.

Reign of Fire imagined a world where live dragons are sleeping underground for centuries then rise to consume the world with fire. These impossible creatures eat ash. How enormous predators could survive on ash is a total mystery.

However, these films didn’t flop because of bad science. They were just bad films, boring even the most easily amused moviegoer.

Obviously Hollywood isn’t concerned with being true to science. It is about ticket sales. I believe audiences know deep down that these movies are mere fantasy masquerading as science. Movies that use regular magic as their foundation tend to struggle. Modern audiences want something both modern and fantastic. You could call it modern magic, technological magic, new age magic, or just modern mythology. Whatever you call, it’s a thing now.

In addition to science taking a back seat in the sci-fi genre, the fantasy genre has enjoyed a resurgence over the past decade. Classic fantasy creatures and stories are being inserted into a modern setting. Whether it is vampires, werewolves, witchcraft, or wizards people want to see them walking around today’s world.

There is nothing wrong with modern fantasy. The audience knows that what they see is not real. It is when the fantastic things on the screen pretend to be real that it becomes problematic. Specifically, when the audience buys some of the fake science, I think Hollywood is doing a serious disservice to humanity. If its fantasy, just say its fantasy. It is bad enough over half of Americans still think we use only 10 percent of our brain! It makes no sense to create a whole new wave of urban myths.

J

The post Science Fiction Without the Science appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Review: Three by Jay Posey

Three is an excellent debut novel by Jay Posey, a local author down here in the southeast. It is a post-apocalyptic story without a dystopian theme, which is unusual these days. It is action-packed, thrilling, and well-written. It took a while to finish and left a few questions unanswered in the end, but overall is an excellent debut.

The novel is set in the not too distant future. In this dark post-apocalyptic world, humanity is barely scraping by. Some sort of cataclysm has left civilization in ruins and created a wasteland full of dangerous zombie-like creatures called Weir. Three (yep, that’s his name) is a bounty hunter just trying to get by. He gets involved helping a woman and boy escape some dangerous gangsters, throwing him into the middle of a deadly chase across the wastelands. The two carry a secret many are willing to kill for.

The trek from one post-apocalyptic shanty town to another is both exciting and depressing. It gives also gives you an idea how people are coping with the new world. There is plenty of action and you get to read about the many skills of Three. He is essentially a ninja. However, the trek is long, well over 400 pages. I started to get a little numb to it by the end, particularly the numerous physical injuries suffered during the journey.

Unlike most speculative fiction writers, Posey doesn’t provide much background in his novel. He doesn’t explain what happened to the world and what the Weir are. Usually infodumping slows a story down and can distract readers, but in this case a bit more background info would’ve been helpful.

Posey built some interesting characters a well. Three is a typical anti-hero turned hero (e.g. Han Solo). He starts out as a dark loner but soon starts to care about others. Cass is the protective mother desperately trying to shield her son from the entire world, something that is nearly impossible. You get the impression she has had a rough life and is running from her past, in addition to running from the murderous gangsters.

Wren is innocent and sweet, but doesn’t seem to change much throughout all the different experiences. He faces each trauma as if it is the first he’s witnessed. In such a dismal world, that is hard to believe.

The secondary characters were compelling as well, but a couple didn’t seem to belong. Nearly all of Three’s friends are genuinely good and loyal people, which clashes with his loner, bounty hunter reputation The characters and their relationship with Three felt too good to be true.

Three sees himself as a loner mercenary, who is only interested in getting by. That every man for himself mentality isn’t one that wins a lot of friends. Yet Three has several extremely loyal friends.

The technological innovations are mostly digital in nature, giving it a cyberpunk element but it isn’t really cyberpunk. The protagonists are all good people, who are mainly working with hand-me-down technology and anything left over from the apocalypse.

Science fiction has recently moved in the direction of blending post-apocalyptic and dystopian themes. People get the impression that if there is great cataclysm civilization will take a dramatic turn towards totalitarianism, oppression, and violence. From a historical standpoint, this is often true. However, I think some authors don’t do a good job blending the two themes.

Three doesn’t have this problem. It does not delve into political systems, transformation, or the nature of the downward spiral. It stays focused on the post-apocalyptic setting without trying to complicate or confuse themes by adding a poorly conceived dystopian theme. Some authors can do one of these well, but few can do both. An obvious exception is Suzanne Collins, but in general it was nice to see a writer commit to the core story rather than trying to blend too many themes.

Overall, Three is a solid post-apocalyptic sci-fi novel and would make a great movie. I think Hollywood would cut a few scenes and truncate a few others but I think it would be entertaining. The book is a blend of The Book of Eli, Leon: The Professional, Mercury Rising, and The Road.

It gets 4 Stars from me.

J

The post Review: Three by Jay Posey appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

The World in 2025

Realclearscience has an interesting article detailing nine predictions about the world of 2025. The predictions come from Thomson Reuters, a research firm with a prestigious record. All of them are positive and exciting, but a bit too optimistic.

The predictions include improvements in treatment and prevention of dementia, rise of solar power as primary energy source, electric cars and planes, increases in food production and efficiency, the end of petroleum based plastics, better pharmaceuticals with fewer side effects, and DNA mapping.

All of them are certainly possible but a couple are more long shots. First, I have been hearing about solar power and the end of plastics since I was a kid. Its been two decades and neither has come to pass. The electric car has been a dream for decades as well. We are definitely moving towards electric cars but it will likely take longer than 10 years for full conversion. Prevention of dementia is definitely a long shot in the next ten years. These four will take longer than 10 years in my opinion.

There will certainly be progress but I think the pace of technological innovation will slow slightly in the coming years, particularly in the United States. The main reason is the student loan bubble. A large portion of tuition payments from students funds research activities that provide the foundation for technological innovation.

There has been so much money available to pay tuition that colleges have jacked up their rates to capture the extra dollars. However, this trend is reaching its end. Parents and students are becoming much more weary of taking on so much debt or paying outrageous tuition rates. Government funding for higher education is also due for major cuts. Less funding and tuition means less funds for research.

Universities do primarily basic research. It is a vital component to R&D but not the only component. Major corporations, small tech startups, and nonprofit research organizations conduct what is called translational research and development, which is turning research breakthroughs into commercial products. Lately there’s been more than enough capital for these kinds of operations but that might be at an end soon as well. The federal government has been pumping billions into the banking system, allowing companies to raise capital cheaply. This is creating yet another bubble. It won’t be nearly as horrible as the 2007-2008 housing bubble, but the burst will dry up all the cheap money floating around.

Not all countries are facing this problem but the United States is the premiere innovator in the world today. Tough economic times means innovative people don’t have has many chances to make their ideas a reality. They have to be more practical, taking jobs that aren’t challenging and don’t allow them to innovate. The innovators are less happy and society loses out on what great things could’ve come from them.

Of the predictions mentioned above I agree with a couple. In 2025, I think the majority of cars sold will be electric but not all of them. Most cars on the road will probably still be gas-powered. By 2025 I would not be surprised if we see the beginning of the end of oil. I’m not sure if we will completely eliminate it as a commodity, but we won’t use it for as many things as we do now. Solar power might be the energy source of the future but I will hedge my bet on that one. There are other potential energy sources that may prove more efficient.

Making predictions about medicine is extremely difficult. People tend to overshoot. The human body is extremely complicated and everyone’s is different. I have noticed an increase in interest in targeting neurological diseases such as dementia, Altzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. Pharmaceuticals are also getting better in terms of limiting side effects but I don’t expect any major jumps in ten years.

As for DNA mapping I strongly agree with that one. I think we are a generation away from predicting our children’s traits and appearance, before they are even born.

The end of plastics would be a huge breakthrough. It would reduce demand for oil and decrease waste pollution from plastic crap that doesn’t break down for hundreds or thousands of years.

Drone technology will progress dramatically leading to the possible elimination of the combat pilot. We might also see the very first laser weapons in use (I’d give it 30 percent chance).

Unfortunately, my view of the next ten years isn’t positive in other respects. The United States faces very serious challenges and, to date, we haven’t been willing to take them on. Social Security and Medicare are nearing collapse. Medicare might go before 2025. The crisis will force us to either raise taxes or betray the promise to the elderly. Both would profoundly damage confidence in the US, limiting new investment.

In addition, the disappointing economic recovery has slowed the career development of young American scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs. Many are taking jobs in areas they didn’t study for in college or graduate school. As a result, they are not gaining the necessary skills and experience to contribute to science and technology. As a result, American innovation will slow and you will see more Nobel Prizes and breakthroughs come from other countries.

Wars also divert resources away from science and technology (aside from weapons development of course). The Middle East and North Africa is already embroiled in violent conflict. However, tensions are rising in Europe and the Pacific. Countries are starting to divert resources away from science and education spending towards defense spending. I am not saying we are going to have a world war. We may not have any major wars at all in the next ten years but there will still be a diversion of resources away from research and towards weaponry.

The 2030s and 2040s might go a lot better, in my opinion. Still, there is enough promise for people to be optimistic about the future. Thomson Reuters might be a little too optimistic but there’s nothing wrong with that. Its nice to dream.

J

The post The World in 2025 appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Who are the Science Fiction Masters of the 21st Century?

A week ago I was watching Prophets of Science Fiction on Science Channel, and a thought occurred to me. It is an awesome show about the eight great science fiction writers of all time and how their work inspired science and engineers to make their fictional technologies come to life. It is only one season (8 episodes I think) but I noticed one thing odd about it. None of the writers were contemporary writers. It seems the greatest sci-fi works were before 1985. Is that true? Has science fiction hit a lull?

Ask yourself, what books in the past thirty years have truly been groundbreaking? Which authors have impacted society and science in a magnitude equal to Arthur C. Clarke or Isaac Asimov? Are there any?

The writers covered in the show are Mary Shelley, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Philip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke, and George Lucas. All of them are worthy of recognition and special attention but all of their masterpieces are from before 1985. I decided to look into this and find the top sci-fi of the past thirty years and the top authors of the last generation.

Three names jumped out: Michael Crichton, Orson Scott Card, and Margaret Atwood.

I love Michael Crichton for his innovation, in-depth research, and attention to detail. His novel Jurassic Park won me over easily with dinosaurs, genetic engineering, evolutionary theory, and… dinosaurs. The movie is a classic, which I’ve seen at least 500 times. His other great works include Sphere (1987), Andromeda Strain (1969), and Disclosure (1994). His work generally falls under the category of technothriller but I think this category could easily be considered a type of science fiction, namely contemporary innovation. His stories don’t venture much into the future and incorporate mostly state of the art technologies taken a step further. I say that in the most positive away possible. Nobody did it like Crichton.

Orson Scott Card’s contributions to science fiction canon began with Ender’s Game (1985). The brilliant military sci-fi novel is often listed in the top 20 sci-fi novels of all time. It is in my top 10. It is the first of a quintet series and the foundation work of much of Card’s writing to date. His expansive knowledge of multiple scientific disciplines and ability to incorporate psychology and religion make his work special.

Then there is Margaret Atwood. When I finished reading Handmaid’s Tale (1985) I was blown away. The dystopian masterpiece had such insight into the experience of women in a horribly repressive theocracy. Its impact is comparable to Nineteen Eighty-Four and Brave New World. Recently her MaddAddam Trilogy has been making waves as well.

1985 was a big year for science fiction. In fact if you expand the time frame to include Star Wars and Jurassic Park, the 1977-1990 period was a golden age. What about the 90s and the 21st century? Is that where the drop off happened?

Orson Scott Card and Margaret Atwood published some strong works in the 1990s and 200s. The Ender Quintet stretches into the late 1990s. Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake (2003) is considered a groundbreaking work in its own right.

Okay, okay, but are there any new authors?

I did some research on this, looking for rankings of recent sci-fi novels, big time new names, critical acclaim, and movie deals. These are a few names that kept popping up.

NEAL STEPHENSON

Neal Stephenson has published numerous successful novels that have been described as cyberpunk or postcyberpunk in flavor. He is known to incorporate advanced mathematics, philosophy, and the history of science. I haven’t read any Stephenson books yet but three have been recommended: The Diamond Age (1995), Cryptonomicon (2002), and Anathem (2008).

JOHN SCALZI

John Scalzi is a famous sci-fi writer specializing in space adventures and military sci-fi. His most often cited work is Old Man’s War (2005). I’ve read it and Redshirts (2012). While both are entertaining reads, I wasn’t blown away. Still, Scalzi has entertained and enthralled readers for nearly a decade and deserves mention.

CHINA MIEVILLE

China Mieville doesn’t have the big-time sales but has won plenty of awards. Perdido Street Station (2000), The City and the City (2010), and Embassytown (2011) are highly-touted favorites of the sci-fi world. I’ve read Embassytown and enjoyed the intelligent approach to alien civilization, language, and diplomacy but the writing style is an acquired taste.

SUZANNE COLLINS

Suzanne Collins work has captivated millions and brought a compelling new heroine to American culture: Katniss Everdeen. The Hunger Games (2008), Catching Fire (2009), and Mockingjay (2010), and sold millions of copies and get rave reviews. I read the first two and enjoyed both of them. The dystopian adventure is captivating but isn’t particularly original. The technological innovations are few and far between and I think it is best categorized as young adult fiction. Great books but I don’t think it is fair to compare them to the works of Clarke, Heinlein, or Asimov.

A few others deserve honorable mention: Vernor Vinge, Charles Stross, Kim Stanley Robinson, Alastair Reynolds, Connie Willis, James S.A. Corey, and Daniel Suarez.

More recently, Ernest Cline and Hugh Howey have emerged as great new voices for the genre. Cline’s Ready Player One (2011) is a great read, introducing readers to the gamers’ subculture. Set in a dystopian future yet most of the story takes place in virtual reality. Hugh Howey’s Wool (2011-212) changed the publishing game. The post-apocalyptic adventure is an extremely successful self-published work that will be made into a movie soon. It is post-apocalyptic with a little bit of steampunk. I think both Cline and Howey are names we will hear more and more as time goes on.

Finally, World War Z (2006) is an absolutely brilliant zombie apocalypse novel that reinvigorated its subgenre in my opinion. I think the work provided the foundation for The Walking Dead graphic novels and the AMC show that is just amazing. The author, Max Brooks, hasn’t written anything notable since then which is a damn shame. Get to it Max!

I probably missed a couple names and a couple books. The genre is very large and hard to take in without spending enormous amounts of time in research. Most of these books that I haven’t read are on my to-read list for sure. If you love sci-fi they should be on yours as well.

J

The post Who are the Science Fiction Masters of the 21st Century? appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Innovation Done Right: The Slingshot water purifer

Innovation is about solving problems; and technology provides the tools necessary to innovate. When the tools are used properly, humanity benefits. When they aren’t, we get overpriced toys. The Slingshot water purifier is an example of the former—an invention that truly benefits humanity and a very real and direct way.

Around the world billions of people do not have access to clean water. Illnesses caused by water-borne pathogens puts many of them in the hospital or just kills them. In the developed world we call these illnesses preventable diseases. They are preventable because if you have enough money and energy, you can provide clean water and prevent said diseases. Obviously many parts of the world don’t have much money and don’t have reliable access to energy.

So that’s the real-world problem: people need clean water that doesn’t cost a lot or use up a lot of electricity.

Inventor Dean Kamen, famous for his invention of the segway, believes he has a solution. His invention, called the Slingshot, is a small portable water purification machine that uses the same amount electricity as a toaster. It uses an amazing system to keep energy usage low, making it a practical solution for third world countries.

Early on there were challenges. He needed a way to bring the Slingshot to places where it was needed most. Enter the Coca-Cola company. The big mega-corporation that people love to hate also has an international distribution network giving it access to dozens of third world countries. Even in the poorest places on Earth, you can buy a Coke.

Coca-Cola combined the Slingshot along with their plan for small self-contained business stands called Ekocenters. They are powered by solar panels and sell canned food, toilet paper, cooking oil, and first-aid supplies. Adding fresh water to the list of products was a no-brainer. According to the magazine Popular Science:

Using a process called vapor compression distillation, a single Slingshot can purify more than 250,000 liters of water per year, enough to satisfy the needs of about 300 people. And it can do so with any water source—sewage, seawater, chemical waste—no matter how dirty.

The Slingshot provides cheap, clean water to those who need it most. Why is it cheap? Why does it need so little energy? Because the Slingshot’s water purification process largely powers itself.

The nasty water is brought into the boiling chamber, then boiled turning the water into vapor while leaving the nastiness behind. The water vapor is moved into a pressurized chamber, which allows it to condense at temperatures greater than 100 Celsius. The super-heated, pressurized water is then moved past the boiling chamber. The movement heats the nasty water in the boiling chamber and cools the super-heated pressurized water. The cooled water is distilled, clean and ready to drink (I’d add a few ice cubes first).

Mr. Kamen began his enterprise with a real world problem and invented something to solve it. He then partnered with an international corporation to bring it to the countries he couldn’t reach himself, bringing the product to those who would need it most.

That is innovation done right.

Not all inventions end up solving their target problems. Some enterprises fail because the concept just doesn’t work. There is nothing wrong with that. The furthering of knowledge involves a lot of trial and error. The foundation of the scientific method is experimentation. Scientists need room to fail. In order to determine which technologies can benefit humanity, we need to know clearly which are producing results and which are failing.

The problem today, is that we invest billions in technologies we hope will solve problems. Even when there’s little evidence to suggest it can, we want to change the world and are placing our feelings ahead of our reason. Hope over rationality.

The biggest example I can think of is ethanol of biofuels. During the oil crisis during the Bush years, people jumped on the biofuel bandwagon. It was the idea that we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce emissions by using blended fuels, which included ethanol from corn. It was perfect. It was cleaner, used less fossil fuels, and the ethanol came from America! Naturally some wanted it to work so badly, they ignored the obvious problems with this approach.

First, American farms could never produce enough ethanol to make a bit of difference in our oil consumption. Secondly, when you grow corn to produce ethanol you are not growing corn to feed people. Food prices rose dramatically, at a time when people were having a tough time paying bills. Third, the ethanol blend was known to cause damage to engines, shortening their life spans and causing users to replace them. Engines are products that require a lot of energy and natural resources to manufacture. Hence, in the end the biofuels initiative caused more problems than it solved.

Ethanol-powered cars was just too good to be true, and we should’ve known better. I worry that we want popular or trendy solutions to work so badly that we invest in solutions that only sound good. Most of us aren’t engineers. I know I’m not. Which is why we should encourage research in all areas and not place billions of dollars on something that merely sounds right.

Science fiction writers could also learn from this. Too many create futures presenting innovations that don’t really solve any contemporary problems or benefit humanity. They are just “cool” or serve as a superficial plot device. In my humble opinion, the best science fiction dreams of solutions to real world problems or those we may face in our future.

J

The post Innovation Done Right: The Slingshot water purifer appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Game of Thrones Recap: The Game has Changed

Westeros is about to go an entirely new direction. The balance of power has been thrown into chaos. The game has changed.

Before this last episode the balance of power favored the Lannister-Baratheon force, led by Tywin Lannister, wisest prince in the Seven Kingdoms. His competitors just couldn’t add up. They included Stannis Baratheon, a poor strategist and uncharismatic leader obsessed with the Red Priestess. Balon Greyjoy never had a chance, but is still technically in rebellion. Queen Daenerys was mired in the struggles of governing Slaver’s Bay, a long way from retaking the throne.

But the game has changed.

Tywin Lannister is dead. There is no one with his ability to defend Tommen’s claim. Jaime has no interest in politics. Cersei’s track record is abysmal.

Of all the houses, who will stay loyal to Tommen? Doran Martell has a perfect opportunity to defect. House Arryn is already on the path to rebellion. I count three kingdoms ready to fight his claim (Stormlands, the Vale, Dorne). Four kingdoms are loyal (Riverlands, Westerlands, the Reach, and the North).

On a side plot, Brandon Stark made it to his three-eyed raven but I don’t know what that means.

As a northerner myself (born and raised in the Chicago area), I have a soft spot for the Starks but don’t see a way for them to restore their power. Rickon is too young and Brandon is in the far north. Sansa is preparing to marry Petyr Baelish or Robin. I am guessing the scenario will be Sansa marries Robin Arryn but sleeps with Petyr, which is what Petyr wanted all along. Arya is on her way to Braavos, which I was always privately hoping would happen.

My prediction is Stannis gains ground in his bid for the Iron Throne. He could roll up Tommen’s forces in the North led by Roose Bolton. If there are any lower houses still loyal to the Starks they will align with Stannis and eliminate the Boltons. A regency is established for Rickon or Brandon, depending on who returns to Winterfell. Stannis is a stickler for laws and rights, so he’d probably restore a Stark to Warden of the North. It also helps that Ned Stark died asserting his claim to the Iron Throne.

Alternatively, Stannis could make another run at King’s Landing and go straight for the throne. It didn’t work too well last time. This would be a poor move. He needs allies but as I mentioned he is not politically savvy.

Queen Daenerys will face many more challenges governing Slaver’s Bay and at some point will need to make a choice. If she wants the Iron Throne, she needs to drop the whole justice and breaker of chains crusade and leave someone to rule the region for her. So far it looks like nobody is up to it.

I think Balon Greyjoy’s attempt at independence is over. He lacks the power to defend himself from Stannis or Roose Bolton.

The new season is laid open for an entire new era of war. Stannis Baratheon, Tommen Baratheon, and Daenerys Targeryen have their work cut out for them. The Seven Kingdoms are far from peace and unity.

J

The post Game of Thrones Recap: The Game has Changed appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Game of Thrones Recap: The Watchers on the Wall

It turns out Jon Snow knows a little more than nothing. Mance Raydor’s ambitious attempt to breach the Wall filled the entire episode. Barely 100 men were there to defend against an army thought to be 100,000 Wildlings. Even worse, there was a troop of them already over the wall that attacked Castle Black from the rear. A brilliant plan! What a battle!

It was a welcome change of pace for Game of Thrones and HBO to give us a full hour of action. As bad as it sounds, I am also relieved that a number of named characters are gone. The size of the cast is always a challenge, good time to lighten the load.

Jon Snow has a lot of his father in him. He has a keen sense of right and wrong. Despite his bastard status he feels a strong devotion to the Night’s Watch and the Starks, adopting their principled nature. He seems to have a knack for tactics like his half-brother Robb. The question is whether his principles will undermine his strategic goals as they did Robb’s.

Mance Raydor’s attack on the wall was well planned and executed. Its failure is due to the incredible efforts of a small group of highly motivated men of the Night’s Watch. The real difference maker was Jon Snow. His efforts on top the wall helped slow the attack on the gate. The battle within Castle Black seem to turn thanks to the efforts of Jon and Sam. Two of the Wildling captains were killed by them, while the remaining one, Tormund, was taken prisoner.

Ygritte died in dramatic fashion. She couldn’t kill Jon and her hesitation cost her her life.

The whole battle had a romanticized Hollywood feel to it, lacking Martin’s typical realism. The deaths were all dramatic, and the stand of the Night’s Watch was a miraculous victory. Kind of cheesy. Still, I can’t deny I was entertained throughout the battle.

The aftermath looks bleak. Best estimate puts the Night’s Watch at maybe 40-50 men left. Raydor’s army remains intact and has plenty of mammoths and giants. Jon Snow’s proposed solution is a duel between Raydor and himself. Raydor would have to be a total idiot to agree to this, but if Snow tweaks his ego or maybe calls him out openly, it might work. I agree with Sam, the Wildlings are going to kill Snow whether he kills Raydor or not.

At the same time Raydor’s endgame is not realistic. Even if he breaches the wall and enters the North he faces the forces of Roose Bolton. Other regional powers: Frey and Greyjoy have incentive to join against Raydor as well and rebuild the Wall. Fighting the Night’s Watch is one thing. Fighting three major houses is another.

One other consideration: Jon Snow points out that without Raydor the Wildling Army collapses. He is right. Raydor has no second in command or successor. Once he is gone, they will fall apart and the North will probably return to the realm of the Seven Kingdoms.

Only one episode left, what subplot will be concluded?

Sansa and Arya are to be reunited. Stannis and Davos return to Westeros with money to rebuild his army. What of Jorah? Will Daenerys forgive him?

J

The post Game of Thrones Recap: The Watchers on the Wall appeared first on Jacob Foxx.

Update on New Projects; On the Writing Process

The first five months of 2014 have been fairly productive. The third novel in the Oraibi series is coming along nicely. I’ve set a deadline for myself to finish it by September 1st. After that, the editing and revision process will take a few months. If everything goes well, the it could be released in the Winter of 2015.

The third novel takes place a few years after the last one, in the middle of the Gaian War. The Times That Try Men’s Souls started with the decision to go to war, including a weighing of the cost and the chances of success. In the end, Alex Newman chose to take on the Terran Federation. With the help of General Moleiro they scored a major victory in the first couple months. However, the war is far from over. Alex, Becca and the rest of the Gaian rebels must find a way to not just win battles, but win the war.

Revolutionaries are almost always outnumbered, with remote odds of victory. Some find a way to win, but many lose. Many successful rebellions and insurgencies nearly failed early in the fight. In the American Revolution, the Continental Army was nearly crushed twice in 1776. Washington was in full retreat after the devastating defeat at New York City. It is around this time that Thomas Paine wrote the words “These are the Times That Try Men’s Souls.” After escaping across the Delaware River, Washington’s army was on the verge of disbanding. In a desperate attempt to reclaim the initiative, Washington made his famous crossing of the Delaware on Christmas Day, surprising the Hessian mercenaries in Trenton. His move threw the British off balance, forcing them to pull back.

There were several instances during the Vietnam War where American forces were very close to defeating the NVA. The American leadership never knew and hesitated. As a result, the Ho Chi Minh’s forces were able to regroup and regain the initiative.

The Confederacy nearly defeated the much larger and better equipped Union Army during the American Civil War. Had it not been for several tactical blunders at the Battle of Gettysburg, we could be two countries today instead of one.

On Gaia, the Oraibi rebels are outnumbered and outgunned. The Federation could’ve sent an army of hundreds of thousands, even millions to defeat the tiny Oraibi force of 30,000 fighters. So why didn’t they? One reason is military alliances are not the most thoughtful or effective leadership structures. It is easy to underestimate the threat of such a small enemy. There is also the greediness of individual coalition members, not wanting to commit so many troops to a conflict sixty light years away. In reality, only a small group of Federation members care about Gaia.

More importantly, the Terran Federation does not have full control of its own planet. Europe, the Americas, and Australia are under their dominion but Africa and most of Asia are not. An alliance desiring to be a hegemonic power needs to take care of business in its own backyard first before it extends itself to distant conflicts. During the Gaian War, the bulk of Federation forces are on Earth fighting to expand their influence into new regions.

A reader asked me why the Federation simply doesn’t use nuclear, chemical, or some other weapon of mass destruction to annihilate the Oraibi. It is a good question and one I had to consider when writing the second book. The Earth was nearly wiped out due to a nuclear war, the White Storm. The whole purpose of building a colony on Gaia was to establish a new homeworld free of nuclear fallout. To use nuclear weapons on the new world would completely defeat the purpose of the Ark Project and the terraforming of Gaia. Gaia is already a tough and rugged planet with limited arable land. It makes no sense to use such weapons, obliterating its most valuable resource: clean land, air, and water.

The Oraibi series has moved into new subgenres. The first book was a post-apocalyptic/dystopian novel focusing on the aftermath of a great cataclysm. It becomes the genesis of a new ideological struggle for the future of humanity. The second book is about the personal and political challenges of leading a rebellion against a powerful foe. The post-apocalyptic and dystopian elements receded into the background in The Times That Try Men’s Souls. It is predominantly high-tech, political science fiction. The third book will be almost straight military science fiction.

Classifying literature into genres and subgenres helps us organize information and better understand and compare novels. I believe exercises in categorization should never constrain the direction of the story, which is why I tend to change subgenres when the story calls for it. I want to write stories in a number of genres and subgenres, testing my own limits and also learning what is most appealing to readers. Who knows, maybe I’m a mediocre sci-fi writer but a brilliant romance novelist. (not likely).

There is also a part of me that wants to write stories that don’t have the same seriousness as the Oraibi series. About a year ago, I began working on a story about a group of regular people just trying to live their lives out in the far reaches of space. They work on warmeks, large fighting robots that are entered into high-stakes prize fights. They aren’t motivated by any ideology or political object, it is just a job.

The characters aren’t doctors, lawyers, scientists, or generals. They’re soldiers, blue-collar workers, ex-cons, club owners, gamblers, drug addicts, alcoholics, and womanizers. While in the midst of a new prize fight, a war breaks out between the core planets and the outer rim planets. They are dragged into a conflict. The story is about them trying to get by during an interstellar war they have no interest in fighting.

I also want to release the series as episodes of around 70-120 pages rather than full-length novels. I got the idea from successful series like Wool by Hugh Howey, the Atopia Chronicles by Mathew Mather, and The Human Division by John Scalzi. All three were released one story or one section at a time. Readers were able to start by reading a portion of the overall story and deciding whether they wanted to continue or give up and move on to something else.

Personally, for me there is some hesitation when picking up a novel from an author I’ve never read before. A novel can take 10-12 hours to read. I have to ask myself “Do I want to commit 10-12 hours to this no-name author? How do I know I’m not wasting valuable hours of my life on this?”

With this in mind, I decided to write the Mek stories as shorter episodes and putting the price at $0.99. It is similar to an hour episode of a TV drama. There are some restrictions with this format as well, but they aren’t as bad as I thought.

Take Game of Thrones. Each episode is one hour long. Most episodes end without resolving any of the subplots. Yet people are hooked. HBO and George R.R. Martin pull this off because the show is well-written, the characters are diverse and interesting, the setting is fascinating, and just has a rugged realism that I think many find refreshing. There is also a big overall story arc, the battle for the Iron Throne.

Game of Thrones is not the only show to use this format. The Sopranos, TrueBlood, Weeds, The Walking Dead, and 24 use this as well. All of these shows are made with a level of quality and honesty that get audiences hooked despite open-ended, inconclusive endings to episodes.

Should authors write novels with such commercial considerations in mind?

Some might call this compromising the craft or “selling out.” This is true to some extent but its been true for a very long time. Take any class on classic literature and you will hear the professor touch on the author’s perception of his audience and how he was mindful of the era and what people might want to read. Every great author thinks about his audience the same way a screenwriter or director thinks about moviegoers.

It is about impacting as many readers or viewers as possible with one’s story, not only for the financial benefits but because I believe it ought to be the of any art. Artists don’t make paintings to be hung in someone’s basement, never to see the light of day (except for Basil Hallward’s portrait of Dorian Gray). Producers don’t make movies then put them on their shelf to collect dust. Books are written to be read, movies made to be seen, and portraits painted to captivate.

Sometimes an artist, producer, or writer may create something for themselves or for a specific audience with no commercial intentions. These are usually called commission works. That is not the kind of work I do.

I’ve been writing for less than four years. There is still a lot for me to learn, and many aspects of my writing I need to improve. It is an ongoing process and I will continue to work hard at it and work towards entertaining and enthralling the greatest number of readers I possibly can.

It is my hope the Oraibi series and the Mek series will accomplish that or at the very least move me closer to my goal.

J

The post Update on New Projects; On the Writing Process appeared first on Jacob Foxx.