Oct 18 2011

Upgrading my Desktop (and Other Anachronisms)

Published by under Notes & Asides,Technology

I’m one of those dinosaurs whose computer still exists as a collection of components mounted in a large aluminum box. Therefore, unlike the mobile device users who are laughing at the crusty immobility of my platform, I don’t have to throw the whole thing out when it gets too slow. I can fix it! Desktop computer builders fix their machines by upgrading them. Virtually every significant problem is a good excuse for an upgrade. It’s a testament to the quality of the components available now that my last upgrade was over three years ago.

I’m currently running an E8500 wolfie on an Asus motherboard with a P43 chipset and 8 GB of ram. The wolfdale has really been struggling lately. I have Visual Studio solutions that take 3-4 minutes to load. That’s unacceptable. I need more cores. I also have a GTS-250 graphics card w/512MB. Similarly unacceptable! Battlefield 3 and Skyrim are coming out. The latest generation of any classic game title also provides a valid excuse for an upgrade, and I have two coming at me. Clearly work must proceed on a component list forthwith.

But wait, it is a damn interesting time to be planning an upgrade. I don’t think I’ve been faced with this many tough choices in a long time…

Processor: I5-2500K vs I7-2600K

The 2600K is roughly $100 more, and clocks just .1 Ghz faster. It has hyperthreading on all four cores, and 2MB more L3 cache. I think that’s about it. Do I need hyperthreading? Four cores is a pretty good upgrade from my dualie already. Do I need four more virtual ones? Will I care about that 2MB of cache? I think I might. Leaning 2600K but not sure.

Chipset: P67 vs Z68

The P67 chipset is the tweakable “geek” version of the last Intel platform. The H67 was the mainstream “never touch the BIOS” version. The H67 supported the Sandy Bridge on-chip GPU, but the P67 did not. Now the Z68 combines the tweakability with the onboard GPU support and some drive-caching technology for SSD owners. Do I care about the onboard GPU? Not really, but it might be nice if my graphics card craps out. The rest of the stuff I don’t care about. Leaning P67.

GPU: 560ti/1GB

No real dilemma here. There’s zero chance I will pop for $300 -$500 for a GTX-570 or 80. Midrange for the win, and this will be a major upgrade over my GTS-250.

Monitor: too many factors to list

The monitor is really driving me nuts. I have a 5 year-old Dell 2405. It’s a slow panel, but it has served me well. I now need more screen space, and so I am adding a second display. The problem is that I detest 1080 line LCDs. Please. I had more lines than that on my NEC 17″ fifteen years ago! As a developer I need those lines. On the other hand I would love LED backlighting. It’s cooler and you get far better dark range colors. I would also like a fast panel. I would also like to match the 24″/1920×1200 of the current monitor, just for the sake of symmetry. Really have no idea which way to go here. Choices seem to be something like Dell’s 24″ S-IPS, which is 16:10 but fairly slow at 8ms, or the larger 25″ or 27″ 1080 (yeccch) displays from Acer or Asus.

I guess it’s nice to have choices.

No responses yet

Sep 29 2011

Steal My Copper, Please

Published by under Notes & Asides,Opinion

Copper is neat stuff. It’s malleable, ductile, resists corrosion, transfers heat readily, and can be easily soldered. In various forms it is incredibly useful. There are around 50 pounds of copper in an automobile, and 11,000 pounds in a diesel locomotive, for example. One of the less useful forms that copper takes is when it is extruded into long, thin wires, coated in insulating material, and strung between wooden poles to carry analog telephone signals. We still have one pair of these wires coming into our home, and I can’t for the life of me figure out why.

Our local carrier is Embarq, or whatever they are calling themselves these days (DinoComm? DustyLink?). For $30 a month they offer us a hard-wired circuit-switched connection to any local phone number I care to call. That is, assuming I remember the number, and don’t mind dialing it in manually. Thirty bucks a month. If I want to call any of the neighboring area codes, have voice mail, call forwarding, caller ID, etc., all of that is extra. We recently dropped all that stuff on our one remaining line. Before that it was $60/month.

Sixty bucks! That’s nearly half my Comcast bill, for a single lousy voice circuit. Really? I’m still paying these guys why? I can’t figure it out. We don’t even use the line anymore. Nobody uses the line anymore except a couple of marketing bots that hang up as soon as I answer (even the guys who write marketing bots don’t give a crap about telephones anymore). We use email, SMS texting, cell phones, and Skype for virtually all our communications needs. Skype is $29/year and I can call anywhere in the U.S. and Canada, with good quality, with one-click dialing, with video, and I can exchange text messages and files at the same time.

We came very close to cutting the cord completely a few months ago, and just couldn’t quite get there. It’s easy to generate doubt. What about 911? It doesn’t work on Skype but we all have cel phones and it does work on them. What about when the power is out and the computers are down? Well, the phone on the copper line is wireless and needs power too… and we have cel phones. All of the real questions have answers. Still, we didn’t get rid of it, and we’re still donating $30 every month so that Embarq can afford to scrub the rust off their trucks. It must be some sort of cultural nostalgia, or the communications infrastructure equivalent of apron strings.

According to the FCC (Table 2.2 Statistics of Communications Common Carriers) in 2006 there were 2.7 billion kilometers of metallic (mostly copper) wire in the physical plant of the country’s licensed local telephone carriers. I did a double take when I saw that number, and had to think about it a bit before I realized that this stat counts every conductor. If you look at sheathed metallic cable, most of which will have multiple conductors, the figure is 6.1 million kilometers. I googled around a bit on some stats for how much copper that represents, and calculated that it’s in the category of “metric ass ton.” If you want to get more specific, have fun with it. However you look at it, there’s a lot of metal hanging from wooden poles so that forgotten autodialers sitting in some dusty office closet can call me and hang up as soon as I answer.

Copper today is selling for $3.30 or so on the New York Exchanges. Next week in this space: the Post Office.

No responses yet

Aug 08 2011

Keep the Stars, I’d Like a One G Drive

Published by under Opinion,Technology

I have to admit, I’m a complete space geek. That’s one reason why I was thrilled to read this week about the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s grand initiative to seek the fundamental science of interstellar travel, with the goal of developing the enabling technologies by 2111, one hundred years from now. This is good stuff. We need it, by God. In the middle of the last century John Kennedy challenged us to land a man on the moon, and that vision sustained America, in many ways, through some dark and divisive days. In this time of credit downgrades, defaults, unemployment, inflation, foreclosures, the snickering of our enemies, and the bickering of our politicians, an initiative that calls us to envision the greatness we might achieve in a century is more than welcome.

That said, I think I would have suggested a more reasonable target than the stars. I grant that “The Stars!” is a far more potent rallying cry than “A One Gravity Constant Acceleration Propulsion System!” Nevertheless, that’s what I would have suggested, and that’s where I believe our energy and resources ought to be focused. The stars may someday be accessible to us, but a high specific impulse one gravity drive would open up the entire solar system as soon as it was available. The math of constant acceleration is a wonderful thing to behold.

Start from a dead stop and begin accelerating at one gravity, or 9.8 meters per second, squared. In 10 seconds you are travelling 98 meters per second. In 30 seconds you’re moving at 294 meters per second, or 17 kilometers per minute. By the end of your first hour of one-gravity acceleration you’ve reached the blistering speed of 35,280 meters per second. That’s more than 126,000 kilometers per hour.  If you can keep this rate of acceleration up for a week you’ll be moving at more than 5000 kilometers per second. In about 354 days you’ll hit C, the speed of light in a vacuum. Well, actually you won’t, or maybe you will; we really don’t have any idea. But with a one-g drive we could find out in a year. A few years more could put a probe powered by such a drive in the Alpha Centauri system.

As cool as that sounds, the benefits of a one gravity drive don’t derive from streaking across interstellar space at the speed of light. The benefits lie right here in the solar system. Currently getting around the local neighborhood is extremely difficult for us. The reaction engines we have available produce many times one gravity of acceleration, but can only operate for very short periods at high rates of fuel consumption. That’s good, because we need such engines to get off the ground. Obviously if you light off a one-gravity drive at ground level the thing will just sit there and look imposing, and perhaps hum a bit. But once in space these low specific impulse (fuel inefficient) reaction motors become a liability.

Everything in the galaxy is in orbit around something else, riding around and around the inside of a deep well of space created by the gravitational fields of massive objects. The moon orbits Earth, which orbits the Sun, which orbits the galactic center, which orbits something much vaster that I am unfamiliar with. The center of a cluster or something. A spacecraft, once it is free of Earth, is another orbiting object in this vast dance. But, because it has power, it can do something no other object in the universe can do: it can decide to change its orbit. It can do this by applying forces to add to or subtract from its velocity. To put it simply, if you are in an orbit, and you add velocity, you move to a higher orbit. If you subtract velocity you move to a lower.

Because we can only burn our reaction motors for very short times, a human spacecraft that wants to travel from Earth to Mars, for example, has to use something called a Hohmann Transfer Orbit. To put it simply, because I am incapable of putting it other than simply: the spacecraft begins at Earth, sharing Earth’s solar orbit. It is then accelerated until it is in a higher solar orbit that meets with the orbit of Mars at some point in the future. It then coasts until it reaches the orbit of Mars, and decelerates to match Mars’ orbital velocity. Voila! And it only took five years! Yeah, Hohmann transfers are slow. First, you have to delay even starting until the objects are in relative positions that make the voyage practical. Then you have to boost yourself into a high orbit, switch off the motors, and just ghost along for years.

With a one-gravity constant acceleration drive the trip would be slightly more expeditious. You could calculate a trajectory through the solar gravity field that intercepted the object you wished to reach, taking into account deflection from other gravity fields, and then point yourself in the right direction and light off the drive. You accelerate at 1 G until you’re halfway there, and then turn around and decelerate at 1 G for the remainder of the voyage. The moon would be hours away. Earth to Mars? Something like three days. Mars to Jupiter? Maybe ten. Now that’s cool. Such a drive would instantaneously render the entire solar system open to human exploration and exploitation, and would lead to further advances that might one day actually take us to another star.

Exciting, for sure. Achievable? Make no mistake: a one-gravity constant acceleration drive of high specific impulse is magical fantasy. Perhaps it is slightly less so than a lightspeed drive, a warp drive, a transporter, or a holodeck, but it is fantasy just the same. Still, if we’re going to set a very high, very long term goal, I think this is the one to shoot for. We may very well never get to another star. Even if the challenges of distance, time, and velocity can be overcome, the remaining technical challenges of fuel consumption, heat dissipation, hull integrity, radiation, communication, and a hundred other problems might very well be enough to keep us home.

By contrast, we already know pretty well how to survive and navigate our own solar system and return home safely. We simply lack the power to do it in a reasonable time. If we were to gain that power, it would be of far more immediate benefit to the human race than reaching another star system. It would open the vast resources of every corner of the solar system, and if there is other life to be found in the galaxy, mastery of our own system would set the stage for someday encountering them on more equal terms. The stars might make a more compelling objective, but a one-gravity drive is really the key to a human future in space.

No responses yet

Aug 01 2011

Ineffectual Ventures

Published by under Opinion,Technology

Here’s a question: what do you do after you’ve made it? I don’t mean had a couple of wins and put a few bucks in the bank. I mean absolutely, unequivocally, ball-out-of-the-park made it? Dr. Nathan Myhrvold, the former Chief Technology Officer at Microsoft, has definitely made it. He leveraged his massive intellect and first-class education into a career at the hottest startup of his era, and in the process made hundreds of millions of dollars, at least. So what do you do after you’re done with game seven of the series and emerge the big winner?

For Myhrvold’s former boss Bill Gates, his friend Warren Buffet, and many other very wealthy individuals, the answer has been philanthropy. For some, like Steve Jobs, it’s a second turn at the reigns of the horse you rode across the finish line in the first race. Others are serial entrepreneurs. Not a few have embraced the greatest challenges of our time. Paul Allen and Elon Musk build spaceships. For many of the newest mega winners, such as Mark Zuckerberg, the question remains to be answered. What about Dr. Myhrvold?

According to a recent investigative piece by NPR, the answer appears to be, at least in part: buy up a huge number of patents and go fishing for dollars. Myhrvold’s company Intellectual Ventures was ostensibly founded to be an incubator for innovation, and indeed it is involved in a lot of interesting projects, many a good bit more relevant to humanity than the world’s most expensive cookbook. The company holds around 1,000 patents on original work, which is pretty damn impressive. On the other hand it has purchased over 30,000 patents for it’s portfolio, and has allied with a shadowy network of employee-less patent trolls (many located in the same building full of empty offices in the Texas town of Marshall) to monetize those intellectual properties through the usual mechanism of threatened litigation.

I don’t need to address here whether software patents are a good or bad thing in themselves. I instinctively don’t like them, but on the other hand I’m a believer in the idea that software is analogous to machinery. If it’s machinery, then why shouldn’t it be patentable, as machines have long been? The question is troubling to me, but it is deserving of its own debate. The issue here is not whether software patents are right or wrong, but rather that the process by which they are currently granted is completely broken. There are patent trolls out there right now suing for license fees on ideas as basic as popping up a tooltip when the mouse is moved over a rectangular area of the screen. The NPR piece talks about a guy who literally has a patent on just about everything everyone does online. Myhrvold’s company used to own it.

It doesn’t take a genius with a doctorate to know that the system is broken, and that patent examiners are unable to accurately judge prior art, or whether what they are seeing is really a unique design for a new machine or process. My own work has been cited in five granted software patents. The articles cited in the patents were all written back in the nineties for journals like Computer Language and Dr. Dobb’s. There’s not one line of original work in any of them. I wasn’t doing original work. I was summarizing technologies for readers who wanted to understand them. I didn’t discover or invent anything, or lay the foundations for anything to be discovered or invented. So what is my work doing in patent disclosures?

That’s the problem, and it’s why I was disappointed to read what Intellectual Ventures has been up to. I have long been an admirer of Dr. Myhrvold, albeit one who will never spend $600+ for his cookbook. I have heard him speak, and read what he’s written, and I don’t believe he can convince himself that the actions of his company are encouraging innovation, or supporting the efforts of small inventors. They certainly could do that. There’s nothing wrong with their model if it is pursued honestly. But they are trolling with a wide net, and catching too many of the wrong kinds of fish.

Patents were originally intended to encourage innovation by offering protected disclosure of methods and processes. Nothing is disclosed when a patent is granted on something basic like tooltips, or remote updating of software, because nothing needed to be disclosed. We all already know how to do those things, which is a pretty clear indicator of prior art. The effect of these patents is simply to erect private tollgates on well-traveled roads. Good software patents might be healthy, but bad software patents are definitely unhealthy, productive of a relationship more parasitic than nurturing. The NPR piece is conclusive, as far as I am concerned, with respect to Dr. Myhrvold’s participation in this business. That’s too bad. With his mind I have no doubt he could make himself another billion or two, and in a much more productive and satisfying way: by inventing something cool.

No responses yet

Jun 17 2011

Windows 8 Hurts My Brain

Published by under Opinion,Technology

At D9 Microsoft showed the Windows 8 UI for the first time. All the attention was on the touch-oriented “Live Tiles” interface. Business Insider and some other pubs have taken to calling it “Windows 8 for Tablets.” I don’t know if that’s what it is. About all I can tell is that the Live Tiles interface is supposedly an addition to, not a replacement for, the native Windows UI. That’s good. Getting all touchy-panny with some pretty photos on a ginormous wall screen that costs more than my truck is impressive, but it doesn’t mean much to desktop and laptop users.

Live Tiles on desktops and laptops makes about as much sense as wings on a Hyundai Sonata. Microsoft has said that Windows 8 will run on some different processors, i.e. ARM, Intel system-on-a-chip, whatever. Those aren’t running Alienware gaming boxes. So is this meant to be the UI of the mobile version of Windows 8? Who knows? Is it Windows Phone 8? Apparently not. When asked how developers would write applications for the new Windows 8 UI the company said “HTML 5 and javascript.” Developers and some industry pundits interpreted this to mean no Silverlight for Windows Phone apps. To many people this seemed to make sense, given the expansion to new hardware platforms.

But hardware independence is what .NET, the CLR, and Silverlight are all about. Programmers have invested a lot of time learning the technology stack. When Microsoft released Windows Phone 7 they built the application model and UI on Silverlight for Windows Phone. Developers could leverage everything they new about C#, XAML, and the Silverlight version of the framework to write apps for the mobile platform. Then those apps could be submitted to the shiny new Microsoft app store and start generating iOS-like sales. Now… what? The native mobile interface to Windows 8 will be HMTL + script, but you’ll be able to run Silverlight apps too?

According to some comments I’ve read Microsoft has clarified their position and said that there “will be a place” for Silverlight apps on Windows (Phone?) 8 (for Tablets?). I can’t find any direct quote. On the Silverlight forums the official response has essentially been: we can’t talk now, but don’t believe everything you read, and we’ll say more later. But they’ve said too much already. Why launch a platform and all of the tools to support it, and then make such a radical change in the next version? Has Microsoft figured out that they can’t build a native app ecosystem, and decided to attack Apple’s by promoting HTML 5 and javascript?

I’m not sure, but they’ve at least given me another good reason to continue my efforts with iOS, HTML 5 + JQuery, and Android. Why invest in native Silverlight apps for Windows Phone 7 if Microsoft won’t clearly commit to carrying forward the key components of the platform or building the ecosystem?

3 responses so far

May 31 2011

Jersey Sore

Published by under Notes & Asides,Places

I’ve lived in New Jersey now, off and on, for nearly twenty years, but I’m not a native. I was born in Michigan and have at various times lived in New York, Indiana, Rhode Island, Maryland, California, New Hampshire, and the British Virgin Islands. None of the places I’ve lived has been perfect. They all have their good and bad points. When it comes to New Jersey, though, nobody seems to acknowledge the good. From comedians to columnists to Internet forum posters the standard line is that New Jersey consists of a single strip of industrially polluted concrete running from New York to Philadelphia, studded with chemical plants, refineries, landfills, and tanning salons. Now, thanks to MTV’s “Jersey Shore,” everyone also thinks that the open space between the salvage yards and tattoo parlors is crammed with orange-tanned goombahs sporting oily hair and neck chains.

If that’s your view of New Jersey, then rejoice. Your ignorance quotient is about to be attenuated significantly. You’re about to learn that not only is New Jersey nothing at all like the popular stereotypes would have it, it is in fact one of the most beautiful places in America. From the mountainous Highlands of the northwest, to the fertile rolling hills of the midlands, and the vast undeveloped tracts of pinelands in the southeast, New Jersey combines a little slice of everything that is best about our continent. I won’t ask you to take this on faith. In order to make my point I’ve combed through thousands of pictures of the state that I have taken over the years, and selected fifty that I think show a New Jersey most of you don’t know exists. This is the New Jersey that I know, and I’d like you to know it too.

Click here to launch the slideshow

When you’re through enjoying the images, consider this: all that beauty, the pines, the highlands, the hunt country, the Delaware River, Delaware Bay, miles of shoreline, all of it, is within 1-2 hours of New York City and Philadelphia, and 3-4 hours from Baltimore and Washington, DC. In other words, we win. We have our share of problems, to be sure. Taxes are too high, and we have a lot of challenges in terms of how to maintain economic growth and rebuild infrastructure… but then so do the states most of you live in, and our Governor doesn’t have a secret second family. Yet. So the next time you see some Jersey-hater hating, point them toward this post so they can get some education. Better yet, come visit yourself. Then you’ll know what I’m talking about.

3 responses so far

May 31 2011

Creating Image Thumbs with TransformedBitmap and ScaleTransform

Published by under Programming

With WPF and the classes in the System.Windows.Media.Imaging namespace, creating thumbnails from source images has never been easier to do. The code fragment below illustrates how to create thumbnails from a source image using TransformedBitmap and ScaleTransform. You can use the same technique to apply other types of transforms to an image, such as rotations.

Let’s first define our method signature…

using System.Windows.Media;
using System.Windows.Media.Imaging;
void CreateThumbnail(string sourceImage, string outputImage, int width, int height)

The next thing to do is to get our source image into a BitmapSource…

BitmapSource imageSource = BitmapFrame.Create(new Uri(sourceImage));

The class that defines the transformation to be applied to the image is ScaleTransform. We need to create one of these and set the scaling factor to be applied to the width and height…

ScaleTransform st = new ScaleTransform();
st.ScaleX = (double)width / (double)imageSource.PixelWidth;
st.ScaleY = (double)height / (double)imageSource.PixelHeight;

With the transform defined, we need a TransformedBitmap to apply it to…

TransformedBitmap tb = new TransformedBitmap(imageSource, st);

The TransformedBitmap now contains the bitmap after the scaling transform has been applied. The only thing left to do now is write it to disk. In the process we’ll add some metadata just to show how that is done as well…

BitmapMetadata thumbMeta = new BitmapMetadata("jpg");
thumbMeta.Title = "thumbnail";
JpegBitmapEncoder encoder = new JpegBitmapEncoder();
encoder.QualityLevel = 100;
encoder.Frames.Add(BitmapFrame.Create(tb, null, thumbMeta, null));
using (FileStream stream = new FileStream(outputImage, FileMode.Create))
{
    encoder.Save(stream);
    stream.Close();
}

And that’s pretty much all there is to it. As I mentioned above you can use this exact same approach to apply any of the other transform classes in the System.Windows.Media namespace. These are all derived from System.Windows.Media.Transform, and in addition to ScaleTransform they include: RotateTransform, SkewTransform, TranslateTransform, and MatrixTransform.

No responses yet

May 30 2011

SmoothGen 0.9

Published by under Programming

Recently I went hunting for an open source slideshow tool that would work with my WordPress installation. I found lots of alternatives, but most of them interacted with the WordPress database in one way or another, typically by requiring the slideshow to be defined by attaching pics from the media library to a post, and then annotating the post with some tag that would kick off the slideshow.

There’s nothing wrong with the built-in media library, as far as it goes, but it isn’t really suited for managing large numbers of images sorted into categories, i.e. 30 images for one slideshow, 20 for another, etc. There are some plugins that improve on it, but this was all more complicated than I wanted it to be. All I wanted was to be able to prepare a folder of images and have the slideshow drive off of that. Fortunately I discovered exactly what I needed in JonDesign’s SmoothGallery 2.0.

SmoothGallery is a MooTools-based slideshow driver that works off of an HTML document or fragment that describes all the images in the slideshow, as well as the metadata associated with each image (title, description, etc.). The nice thing about this is that it is search engine friendly, and self-contained. The downside is that you have to prepare the HTML document that describes the slideshow. I’m pretty lazy, and didn’t relish the idea of manually adding image elements for 50 slideshow images. So I wrote a tool to do it for me.

SmoothGen is a simple console program that takes as input a folder of images, and outputs a complete HTML document describing the slideshow. It supports all of the options available in SmoothGallery, as well as some additional features such as alternative thumbnail sizes, changing the height of the info pane, and importing title/description fields from image metadata. It was written to work with SmoothGallery 2.0, and requires the .Net framework version 4 to run. The source is included, so you should be able to rebuild it for earlier versions of the framework if you need to. If you have any questions that aren’t answered in the documentation, feel free to drop a comment here.

Download SmoothGen 0.9

No responses yet

May 18 2011

Re-run TV?

Published by under Notes & Asides,Technology

I got a kick out of this. It was revealed this week that the share of downstream Internet traffic generated by Netflix customers’ streaming movies reached thirty percent in the last measuring period. Thirty percent. But as eye-opening as that figure is, it’s not what I got a kick out of. In some bit of reporting associated with that announcement I learned the following little gem: the pet nickname by which people in Hollywood sometimes sneer at Netflix is “Re-run TV.” I find this genuinely funny. Twenty-five or -six million people (including me) are streaming content from Netflix, comprising thirty percent of all downstream traffic, but Hollywood can still look down on them because they’re just “re-runs.”

In the world these guys grew up in, the one in which their business model was based on total control of content and delivery, there was for each piece of programming a “first run” during which the media biggies allowed people to watch it once, assuming they could be in front of the delivery device at the appointed time. Subsequent performances were “re-runs” for which the media corps were paid big bucks by smaller networks and independent broadcasters. Run, and re-run. And since everything on Netflix has been seen before, why hell it’s all just a bunch of re-runs. In their world, once, and in their dreams now, the viewing public flocks to them en-masse for the must-see content, and once that content has been seen they might agree to dribble it out bit by bit to other, clearly inferior outlets.

Meanwhile, on Planet Reality, I got to watch five seasons of Lost, all of Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, four seasons of Rescue Me, Weeds, Big Love, Torchwood, and dozens upon dozens of documentaries and movies, including most recently all the best, campiest Bond flicks from the sixties. Some of the movies I’ve seen before. Most of the television I haven’t. It’s all “first run” to me, and delivered to my computer, in my office, or on either of our two TVs, when I want to watch it. More importantly, the only way any of the networks can get anywhere near having twenty-six million people care what they are doing on a given night is to get two cute royal kids to marry each other. Hard to pull that off regularly.

No responses yet

May 18 2011

Indie Fiction @ The 4th Realm

Published by under Words and Writing

My friend Kris Kramer is running a website that highlights indie fiction over at The 4th Realm. The site was originally set up to feature serial shared-world stories that he and some friends are working on, but the group is now soliciting other works of fiction to appear on the site. My story “Authenticity” was just posted there over the last few days. Here’s an excerpt….

Marton gripped the armrests of his chair and stared at the pad on the desk. His face looked grainy and skewed on the screen, but it was his face. His face. He shifted, and the leather cushion squeaked under him. On the bookshelf behind Gruenwald a small digital clock blinked. The ventillation system came on and in the far corner of the room a potted plant shuddered as the air began to move. Marton looked up. “I don’t know who I’ll be,” he said.

“You,” Gruenwald said. “In every internal respect that matters: memories, thought patterns, reactions, emotions, hopes, dreams. Self-consciousness. All the things that make us who we are.”

“But the body…”

“Will be very strange at first. Exceedingly strange. But you will become used to it. People have body parts removed, and they become used to it.” Gruenwald picked his stylus up from the desk and held it in both hands, rolling it between thumbs and forefingers. He smiled. “If you could have a body part added,” he said, “something which is fortunately no longer legal, you would become used to that too. It is the same here. In a few months you will feel as if it has always been yours, and Marton, it is a younger and much better body.” He put the stylus back down. “It is worth every penny of one hundred million dollars.”

If you’re interested please stop by The 4th Realm to check out the rest of the story. If you do, be sure to leave a comment to let us know you stopped by. If you’re an aspiring writer, consider joining the site community. For more information on that shoot Kris an email at kriskramer@the4threalm.com.

No responses yet

Older Entries »