What's this?

A journal of progress (or lack of it) on getting the sci-fi book out into the world and "one last edit"ed prior to that. ("The Old Script" was its working title, taken from the final lines of this Peter Boyle poem).

Current thinking: the most interesting part of this process is dissolving it into the broader exobrain process; see exobraining the book 13th Dec 25 for first thoughts on that.

Skip to the end for the latest; it's a working doc.

Top bits

Title ideas (more of em)

Sarracenia. (Bit beat over head with metaphor?)

Your blood is our blood. (Anything with 'blood' in, hmmph.)

Getting help! [24.10.25]

Writing community and help has been fckin vital in getting this thing done up to now. I need to cultivate more and pester people for advice along the way. So some ideas on what I'm doing next to keep that going / grow it.

• Gary Gibson, found via Jericho, but he'll get the full cut if going by his own site presumably. Worth just having an hour's chat to get things going. https://www.garygibson.net/#editing

• Chatting to Sheffield writers workshop peeps again (help get the slack lively again).

If I try to chat to Gary though, I could do with being clear on what I want. Do I know that? It keeps on changing a little. From "Just get closure so I can stop thinking out it" to "Actually, I believe in the book and want to maximise my chances of people reading it, and I'm willing to take the time to try and get it right, including horrible amounts of self promotion."

Redraft journal

Random thoughts

• Wall in John's rooms should probably already be holographic. We go on to show it's a thing in the auction. Should be here too, right? Or give reasons why not. John can choose/ask to dial it back. But then segues into something else happening that means he knows it's getting in his brain. What would that be?
• Show what happens with parents. The final split, which is going to be after Hill gets into school - happens when she's young, remember, and may involve having to go to different place, be with dad. It could be drifting apart at the point. The red toy exchange happens after that - is hill too small there?
• Just reading hexaflex again. Am reminded - part of what makes John's thread work is being carried along with what John's going through, seeing this from this POV. That's compelling in itself, some internal justification for its existence. The difficult is the psychological realism. How could someone possibly react in a situation like that? How can that be written about?
• Via Josie, Cory on reverse centaurs - reviewing AI code = one utterly mindless thing a human like John could be doing.

Figuring out changes #1 [28.10.25]

First post on this. SInce the last time I printed off a draft, I've:

1. Gone through that, scribbled, made some notes on things that might change.
2. Been adding any random thoughts to an oldscript note in SImplenotes
3. Also got a bsquillion oldscript-tagged bookmarks / evernote notes (that I'd like to pull out and then get rid of that app; little actual use to me).

What I need now is an actual sense of direction, maybe something resembling a plan. Otherwise this will go on forever and I'll never have a beer again.

A key question: just how much work do I think is possible/realistic? Also, what's sensible? At a certain point we get firmly into flogging-dead-cheval territory. Yes, there are ways to make it better. But there are opportunity costs for other things I might want to write/do.

Oooon the other hand... I do want to honour the book as much as I can. I do actually want to see if I can get it out there in some form that people might actually read.

On point #1, I thought I'd already noted those down. Apparently not. So let's maybe start with that. I probably also need to just read through again and remind myself of anything in the structure that might have faded in my mind.

What I think is a good idea vs bad idea:

• Trying to artificially graft story on.

• Versus finding organic ways to enhance plot that go with the grain of what the book's doing.

Obv, that artificial difference may not apply, but that's a useful way to think about it.

Broad headings of things to consider for final changes [3.11.25]

Including some thought on what's actually realistic and when to leave alone. Most of these I think can be keyhole surgery rather than butchery, but let's see. Some nabbed from above, some thought of since.

• John's thread:

  • Consider the whole thing, look for ways to develop more narrative drive. Difficult given its nature, but not impossible - there's a lot to tie to in the rest of the book. Various options including beginning the connection with Hill earlier, turning that more into a discovery process, figuring out the clues. It may not need that much.

• Provenance:

  • This needs more thought than I've given it. Hill wouldn't take a voice at face value. The simplenotes above cover a lot of this, but it might be an idea to make it foundational. E.g. the whole system is ostensibly built on protecting human IP, creation, provenance. And there's meant to be an impregnable line between that and automated systems. But... what have we got?

    • Real world examples working on the same thing:
      • the Stone video system for journalists etc.

  • E.g. bouncing off "used Bernard as a proxy, got far enough into the brain stuff to be able to use him": the skin, Ipai can argue, is exactly a way to deepen provenance, make sure any IP captures the true source's creativity in a way that protects them. Hill: you're the one that breached the entire system and you're trying to sell us the cure? [That's a trope to IP too isn't it? I'll sell you the disease and the cure.]

• The bet:

  • What is this going to be? How does it thread through the story? It starts with the outside line setup, and the band names but...

IP system things

Chewing over this again. This is great from Cory (reverse centaur piece):

• "So what is the alternative? A lot of artists and their allies think they have an answer: they say we should extend copyright to cover the activities associated with training a model. And I'm here to tell you they are wrong: wrong because this would inflict terrible collateral damage on socially beneficial activities, and it would represent a massive expansion of copyright over activities that are currently permitted – for good reason!"
• "The day Disney and Universal filed suit against Midjourney, I got a press release from the RIAA, which represents Disney and Universal through their recording arms. Universal is the largest label in the world. Together with Sony and Warner, they control 70% of all music recordings in copyright today. It starts: "There is a clear path forward through partnerships that both further AI innovation and foster human artistry." It ends: "This action by Disney and Universal represents a critical stand for human creativity and responsible innovation." And it's signed by Mitch Glazier, CEO of the RIAA."