Importance of keeping pace with best change.
https://flip.it/ZAFdbH
Remote
chris h - author
@StitchedInkMedia@flipboard.social
mastodon 4.7.3Other Stuff:
Nonfiction: Survival of the Fittest?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1738879275
121 Followers
88 Following
27 Posts
Joined March 13, 2023
Walking on Stones
https://www.amazon.ca/Walking-Stones-Chris-Handrahan/dp/1738879232
Simultaneity Betrayed, Novel (New Release)
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1738879267
https://bookfinity.com/search?searchString=chris%20handrahan&filter=author
https://tertulia.com/search?q=chris%20handrahan
Survival of the Fittest?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1738879275
Any fascistic-like transition from effective democracy necessitates severe recession. Historically, they are locally successful as solutions.
#writing #books #creativity
With #writing, three books are many (except for a thirsty AI).
Original writing is more important than any reviews or opinions of it.
Beware of artificial realization (AR).
First two books of 2–4 book series.
Walking on Stones, Novel (or 'stone unturned')
Coincidence of Chance, Novel (or 'no thinking outside the box')
Systemic Evolutions (or 'involved interpretation')
With stories, the obvious is not always explicitly stated but implied by its absence.
Replying to
Author Recommended: employing the topic of artificial writing, subtle humor inescapably emerged within the story.
Replying to
(US only. No availability in Canada.)
Frequently sale priced.
https://www.walmart.com/browse/0?facet=brand:Chris+Handrahan
Replying to
like hallucinations, humor naturally occurred without explanation.
Simultaneity Betrayed, Novel (January 2026)
Reduced to being your best and only customer is not a success story. Except for a writer.
About artificial writing and its realization.
Categories:
Dystopian Fiction
Visionary and Metaphysical
Speculative Fiction
Soft Science Fiction
Simultaneity Betrayed, Novel (January 2026)
Reduced to being your best and only customer is not a success story. Except for a writer.
About artificial writing and its realization.
Categories:
Dystopian Fiction
Visionary and Metaphysical
Speculative Fiction
Soft Science Fiction
Walking on Stones, Novel
A bit scary in its implications.
Coincidence of Chance, Novel
About artificial writing and its realization.
(By popular demand, soon to be rereleased under new title.)
Systemic Evolutions, Nonfiction
Written from within a highly politicized world.
Trends in AI policy.
Often, one poor solution satisfying the moment will inhibit better solutions occurring for later generations.
#solutions #books
Slipstream fiction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Slipstream is a literary #genre or category of speculative #fiction that blends together science fiction, fantasy, and #literary fiction, or otherwise does not remain within conventional boundaries of genre and narrative.”
Classic authors of genre include Kafka and Borges.
Between five, fifty, or five hundred, five is closest. Unless the argument only includes one species, then fifty is closer. Initial process of reinventing species again is nearest to five hundred.
Unsolicited description for book: Systemic Evolutions.
(Attached image can be sourced through eBay UK or link in BookFinder.)
Weekend Side Note
If a hypothetical investment fund of significant size, say $180B, were to badly underperform for 2025, the results have serious implications.
In Canada, the TSX performed an astoundingly rare return of 28.5%. A well- managed fund performing at the rate of the market should expect a return of $50B resulting in a fund sized around $230B at year end.
If a hypothetical, poorly managed investment fund gained, say, a paltry 7.5% on such a generously giving market year, they should get a return of around $14B and final fund total of $194B at year end.
Counted in billions, 14 can appear a big number unless weighed against its absence of return. The poorly managed fund has actually incurred a short-term “loss of gains” in a rarely generous year of around $35B.
In the long term, over say the next ten years, that loss of $35B increases, at a yearly return of the initial paltry 7.5% (normally good for an underperforming year), to roughly double or $70B.
Fortunately, if the hypothetical fund continues under its current mismanagement, the ten-year 7.5% return is unlikely, thereby reducing the “missed out on” $70B to around $40B as best, or in this case worst, result from an extreme hypothesis of missing funds during one calendar year. Such “loss of gains” exaggerated annually accumulate to massive losses of squandered opportunity over decades.
In the real world, it is merely $14B thanks to the generous “hard to lose” market year, and the loss of opportunity goes unchecked while the pennies get counted.
#how #money #works
Copying critical information. "All true, of course."
AI response to the writer, “go write your own book then.”