"Summer Antarctic Ice Spotted!"
"See the sea of Trinitite!"
OK, so there are probably far too intelligible as well as far too distant.
]]>"Successful heads of corporations already operate at Satori 24. They are joyfully locked into their work." -- John Lilly, 1973
Comprehensible to the minority who know the word "satori". But is there anyone on the planet today who could come up with that?
And incidentally, can psychopaths achieve satori?
]]>Take the sentence from your post: "I can't get a 4G signal here, I'll skype you on my droid as soon as I hit a hotspot, I need a coffee anyway."
Change it to: "I don't have enough wireless bandwidth here, I'll video call you from my pocket-phone as soon as I get close enough to a relay, I need a coffee anyway."
Both sentences convey a sense of the future. The latter one, though, is immediately comprehensible to somebody from 1950. Except perhaps for the fact that they sell coffee near wireless relays.
"Department of Homeland Security proposes relaxing ban on toenail clippers" and "Hello, I'm on the train!" are other examples a sentences containing no new nomenclature but very new concepts.
As a professional science fiction writer, how do you decide between describing the futuristic concept in comprehensible language (but without the context) and inventing plausible (but essentially random) new nomenclature?
]]>Hmmm, using http://www.poemofquotes.com/tools/dada.php and one of your first paragraphs:
horizon culture in range: ban wrt. future International treaties to try to avoid a 'cultural event horizon' preceding a full Singularity
Security toenail from Cultural Super-high-tech anarcho-communism enabled by chips under the big toenail?
]]>It doesn't seem so long ago since I first encountered the contemporary use of 'austerity' as a euphemism for 'swingeing cuts in public spending' as opposed to an ascetic lifestyle choice or an unfortunate state of deprivation possibly glamourized in retrospect ('Dig for Britain' and whatnot). I'd imagine that someone from a decade or so ago would likely have been unable to interpret the above correctly; and an intelligent reader, if pushed to give meaning to it, might have imagined it to be some kind of satirical statement mocking American consumerism.
]]>Neologisms and references to people and events are a bit cheaty, really, no? It's most effective when a word has one meaning to the present reader but another to a future reader, or where a new word provides inaccurate clues to the real meaning (like the reference to a 'droid' - if it were an entirely novel word, the reader could frankly admit to ignorance. 'Droid' would actively mislead and confuse).
]]>"Four Americans killed by U.S. drone strikes, administration discloses"
"Second Star Trek movie 'not that great'"
]]>"RSPCA has called for 'badger-friendly' labels on milk and yogurt"
( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9563335/RSPCA-call-for-badger-friendly-milk.html for those outside the UK for context ).
]]>I recommend the book in general. But for the purposes of this thread, I strongly recommend pages 7, 35, 69, 107, 137, 155, 217, 297, and 379.
I strongly recommend those pages to each and every reader of this thread.
]]>Bioprinter clones TatID in cybernap.
That is - crooks steal a person's identity, including financial accounts and access to services, by printing a copy of the 'identity tattoo' complete with skin.
]]>