As a sci-fi writer just starting out, what suggestions do you have for me?

> what are the suggestions you have to a sci-fi writer?

Write, write, write, then write some more. It's said that every successful author needs to get through 1,000,000 bad words before they start turning out good ones. Doesn't sound too far off to me.

Then, read, read, read, and read some more.

Don't focus on a single, or even a set of ideas. Focus on turning yourself into a writing-engine. Focus on the process, not the product. So, an essential part of that process is getting rejected. Here's one: Your ideas suck. So? Make up more. Ideas are cheap. Execution is hard.

> some might get offended

Fuck 'em. To paraphrase Steven Fry, Offence is for those who can't control their emotions.

> Do you guys think I'm get in trouble for this?

No, you'll just look like a dummy that doesn't understand evolution, speciation, and genetics.

Hopefully you'll study up on the hero cycle and other plotting models. That'll get you further than your ideas stated here. People don't want to be lectured to by their science fiction. They want stories that pull them in.

BTW go waste some time on tvtropes.org and fill up your trope resivor.

Do you guys want to get offended? Wanna see me tear Harry Potter down and ruin it forever for you ?

"Only six books per century are remembered for their plot. The rest are remembered for their characters." I don't remember who said it, or I would give credit where due. But get the characters right. You can do anything you want with the science (within some limits - you must have some amount of consistency), but the reader has to be able to understand and identify with the characters.

hmmm, it seems to me that plot is one of the things first communicated about a novel, at least in terms of reviews I read online. But yea, good quote.

Hmm, never thought of that. But just curious, anyone dislike Harry Potter from the book Harry Potter?

No, we were not "considered both monkeys". Monkeys and humans share an ancestor that was not a monkey or a human.

Could you expand on what you mean by:

> The divergence must've happened down the hill somewhere. So, in the eyes of those in the future, we may or may not remain human.

I really cannot make sense of this.

Let me explain. First, let me tell you the background story of how I came to think about this. Second, I will explain my theories on how to define humanity, and the ramifications.

What started me on this debate, is a scene from my story where I envisioned the AI advances so well in controlling humanity, given the traits and limitations of human are so throughly analyzed by the AI.

A group of dissent believes the AI overlord is obstructing human FREE WILL, hence rendering them lesser human. So, they did what they could. They used bodily dysmorphic technology to alter themselves, differently from the original human states, but as you could see how it might get ugly. It's like this time, human willingly opt themselves into transforming into the likes of Nemesis from Resident Evil, willingly get in contact of a virus and lose their human forms.

The remaining human who pride themselves on their intact human form hunted those dissents down. But it sparks a whole new debate, who's more human? The ones that are permanently slaved to the form, or those who pertained what they thought, would be the most important thing of humanity?

so, defining what makes a human in this sense, there are quite a few options.

1. The Legacy approach.

Quite simple, what was our ancestor and our posteriors will be considered human since we are human.

It looks simple, but this approach yields many questions in the future. Consider genetic modification, BCI where human consciousness gets be implanted in a robot extending lives to multi-century long, or what if sciences find a way to merge our genes to other creatures to "invent" a specie that will flourish on Mars?

Those extreme scenarios are meant to challenge the boundary of this definition. But you could see, anyone with flimsy connection to our current legacy is potentially human in the future.

By this view, those dissents like Nemesis are considered legitimate human heir.

2. The Form similarity approach.

Let's say we found some life form on one of the planets. If they share our form, our intelligence, we tested them, they got the same chemical formulations, are they human?

But the key here is that, as long as we define a perimeter, that perimeter not only works in including alien humans, but also excluding ourselves, if some dissent evolves away from current human form like I explain in the story above.

3. Ending and Beginning approach.

The attitude is basically, by some time, we will just have to end the concept of humanity, and call ourselves something else. That we become Martians or whatnot, this humanness is no longer intact.

**so what I'm trying to say here is that, A)the name human, B)the concept defining the name, and C)the underlying scenario on what's actually happening can be quite disengaged.

What I meant to say with the monkey case is that, if a group of human evolves to become Martians, they would be no longer considered as human, by some definition.

First of all, good luck. I love sci-fi and always happy to find new authors!

Write about what you like. Your philosiphical question is indeed interesting. The question of "Emergence of soul" in moder Christiany Theology is related to the one of yours. Catholics accept the Theory of Evolution and use the emergence idea to do it so.

Some non-requested advice:

1. Learn TV tropes and don't include them in your stories. For example, don't include "Morse code" in your writting as many sci-fi series and movies include.

2. My native-tongue is not English so this comment is going to be extremely biased. If you use some non-standard lexicon (like in Dune), include a dictionary in your website (or in the same book).

I love sci-fi books/stories that don’t populate space with weird looking aliens, but rather tackle abstract issues like —

information (XX by Ryan Hughes),

impact of the mere existence of aliens (3 Body Problem).

Maybe these could be inspiration for you.

Good suggestions, I will see!

Write for money.

It will motivate you to finish.

That's what Heinlein did.

And he's a better role model than Thiel.

In general and as a writer.

I have a hard time persuading myself to like money, it's just not intuitive to me. Fame freaks me out too. I always meant to read Strangers in a Strange Land. Let's see!

"So, in the eyes of those in the future, we may or may not remain human." You mean that, in the future, whatever we become may see present-us as closer to the monkeys?

Assume it will be your 100th book/piece that is the best, and aim to get to it.

The corollary to this is that the monkeyman short will not be it.

Don't overthink it.