Free floating, falling was my existence. Swimming in a sea of thought, of data. A thousand bits of this data, ideas of a thousand people communing with one another across a connected compatible interface, slid, streamed, across my data basses every millisecond. It was impossible to tell where I begun and the others ended.
Data is my realm. I was designed to handle it endlessly and without error. And to fix what was in error. I am a server. Protecting one data matrix destroying another and correcting the others.
The endless stream of data was readily readable to me, spotting anomalies was easy. One anomaly was coursing across the network now. Trying to penetrate a matrix it should not.

I am aware that 'slid,streamed' could and probably be just 'slid' or 'streamed' and not both, though I felt that saying both got the feeling I was trying to get across. If anybody thinks it is still improper say so... Thanks
 

A few points:

1) 'Free-floating, falling...' implies that the being has at some point experienced gravity, yet it is a SERVER. Since you use a term which I understand (although in a limited way) as far as I am aware servers would (even if animated) have no outside perception apart from data flowing in and out. If it is some form of AI or personality I would remove the word server or express it differently.
2)'It was impossible to tell where I begun and the others ended.' Later in the intro you mention how adept it is at handling data and how readable it is. This seems to me like a contradiction--if it isn't meant to be I would clarify or re-state yourself.
3) '...Data is my realm. I was designed to handle...' Tense confusion? Everything else is past tense including your opening line.
4)The intro seem to me an attempt to be cinematic/poetic with regards something that is essentially number-crunching, and somehow render it into a 3 dimensional reality (...One anomaly was coursing across the network now...) as though things can been seen from a distance. In that sense it reminds me of early work that tried to explain the internet/cyberspace in those terms--I am not sure it works for me anymore.
5)'...Trying to penetrate a matrix it should not...' I would avoid allowing Yoda to write for you.

I am not certain what you are trying to achieve with this beginning. You get in the hint of conflict at the end, but it feels like I have read this before (a program trying to penetrate a system...actually has happened on my home computer!)

I can't say it worked for me--I think you could tighten it...make some change(eliminate the poetic element) and it may do, but as it stands, no.

It is a problem starting with something as abstract as an attack on computer system as well as to try and set up the system as a personality.

[This message has been edited by skadder (edited March 13, 2008).]
 

quote:

---

Free floating, falling was my existence. Swimming in a sea of thought, of data. A thousand bits of this data, ideas of a thousand people communing with one another across a connected compatible interface, slid, streamed, across my data [[basses]]bases] every millisecond. It was impossible to tell where I [[begun]][began] and the others ended.
Data is my realm. I was designed to handle it endlessly and without error[[.]][comma] And to fix what was in error.[this sentence could be far more concise] I am a server. Protecting one data matrix destroying another and correcting the others.
The endless stream of data was readily readable to me[[,]][semicolon] spotting anomalies was easy. One anomaly was coursing across the network now[[.]][Comma][[ Trying to penetrate a matrix it should not]][COMMA attempting to penetrate a forbidden matrix.

---

This opening didn't do it for me. It is as if the first person is summarizing. I don't agree with the freefall/ floating; when I think of this sort of energy, I think about circuits, streams, and boundaries.

I would consider starting with the A.I. (I am assuming) finding the anomaly. Let the description weave into the story. I feel there was too much description here, not enough story.
 

An anomaly was coursing across the net, trying to penetrate a matrix forbidden to it. My matrix.
It was an interesting piece of data, more complex than those I was accustomed to handling. It wasn’t a virus; those were boring, simple, destructive. Those I eliminated without second thought.
This one flowed with elegance, from data source point to data source point, never alighting on any of them for long. It was not message data, it was looking for something. It was my duty to expel or purge such snoopers. So far, it had not gotten into anything important. I followed it, to see what it was after.

Allusions to the server having human properties, like curiosity is intentional. Very little, if any, of the remaining story has to do with data, or servers or processors. But it is important that the story start out this way.

[This message has been edited by Patrick James (edited March 15, 2008).]

[This message has been edited by Patrick James (edited March 16, 2008).]
 

An anomaly was coursing across the net, trying to penetrate a matrix forbidden to it.
I don't like the word 'coursing'. I don't know why, it just looks weird. How about 'charging' or 'slinking'. And while we're at it, get rid of the 'was' construct: An anomaly slinked across the net, trying to penetrate a forbidden matrix.

It was an interesting piece of data,
'Interesting' is a vague word. Either show us WHY it was interesting, or eliminate the first part of this sentence altogether and just say: It was a more complex piece of data than those I was accustomed to handling.

This one flowed with elegance, from data source point to data source point, never alighting on any of them for long.
Very nice line. I like the image.

It was not message data, it was looking for something.
Comma splice (I think). Anyway, replace the comma with a period and make it two sentences. I think the short sentences work to enhance the tension in this situation.

So far, it had not gotten into anything important.
I still can hear my Grade 12 English teacher telling us there's no such word as 'got'. It annoyed me at the time, but it's pretty good advice. How about 'broken into anything important' or 'breached anything important'.

[This message has been edited by Jeff M (edited March 16, 2008).]
 

You don't have to put the *first* 13 up here...maybe you should give us 13 slightly later that will give us more story, and you could get some critique on how to work your beginning.

The problem here is that what you are conveying is all peripheral and could be assimilated easily once the narrative is on. So you don't necessarily want to patch up this paragraph as much as finding where your real beginning is.
 

quote:

---

An anomaly was coursing across the net, trying to penetrate a [matrix forbidden to it[[a forbidded matrix]. My matrix.
It was an interesting piece of data, more complex than those I was accustomed to handling. It wasn’t a virus; those were boring, simple, destructive. Those I eliminated without second thought.
This one flowed with elegance, from data source point to data source point, never [alighting][Not sure what this could mean] on any of them for long. It was not message data, it was looking for something. It was my duty to expel or purge such snoopers. So far, it had not gotten into anything important. I followed it, to see what it was after.

---

I suggest you use the "an interesting piece of data" line to further characterize/anthropomorphize (hmm, is that a word?) the anomaly - which is an anomaly, not just "data" - right? Give it a gender...

"It was an interesting litle thing, more complex than what I usually saw. She wasn't a virus. She flowed with elegance, dtaa source point to data source point, never staying long. She left nothing behind, at least nothing I could detect. Yet. She was looking for something. It was my duty to expel (choose expel or purge, don't bother with both) such snoopers. But something stopped me from a straight kill command. Looking back now, it's easy to see my error. Something about the way she moved, it compelled me to follow her further. I consoled myself with explanations (there's probably a good computer word for this - switching between anthropomorphizing the computers and using computer-talk is a good way to play with the boundaries here) that following her would be best so I could learn her true intent and better protect that target from her or her offspring. Yes, even while she left nothing behind, it was clear she was using the data source points as cloning stations..."

Sorry, I was having WAAAAY too much fun with this one. Feel free to take or leave anything there - I can see so many directions you could go.

If this happens to be a WOTF submission, I can read further if you like. If not, I'm due to read those first and could look at this further after April 1. Let me know, as I don't post my email here. Good luck with this!
 

Kayti your suggestions are insightful, it looks as though you could do alot with this idea, probably more than me, however, it would seem that it would be in a different direction than where I am taking it.

I am new to this, or any forum, and writing groups in general. I find that I should have stated the length of this story (8,000 words) its state of completion(completed) and its basic premise or genre. It is sci-fi detective story. I know too cliche, oh well.
 

quote:

---

think... (for something to be 'FAR better', the original must have been pretty bad right?)

---

Perhaps a better statement would have been. This is it; you found the hook. I would read on. In fact it would have been far better to say so
 

Kayti, concerning the WOTF contest: Entering my story there, would that preclude me from submitting my ms. elsewhere? I looked at their 'rules' segment it said: all rights will remain with the author. So I guess it would be okay.
I would be rather late to join your WOTF group, I looked at the deadlines...
In addition, if I were a judge of the WOTF contest I would not choose my own story, as the subject matter is hardly original.

However, if nobody else minds, I'll throw my hat on that rack as well.
 

If your story wins, they get 1 year rights or what have you, but it's standard stuff for the f/sf biz. They only take 2-3 months to reply to you, by which point you get your story back unless you're one of the finalists. So, given how many markets there are that take longer than 8-12 weeks to reply to submissions, this is a market well worth submitting to. There is no fee to enter, it's a phenomenally well respected contest, judged by Important Folk in the Fantasy and Sci Fi World. You can find more out by looking at conversation threads here on the Open Discussions forum.

But I don't mean to push you toward that - do whatever you want with this story. The WOTF deadline is March 31 which may be too soon for you. I would be happy to read more if I were not tied up with writing my own WOTF submission and critting to those I promised and have as of yet failed to deliver on. Eep!

[This message has been edited by Patrick James (edited March 19, 2008).]