Five Ways Science Fiction Can Expand Beyond Homo sapiens

Modern humans are fine, but what if we had a bit more variety in our stories?
Five Ways Science Fiction Can Expand Beyond Homo sapiens


Found via Facebook, a fake testimonial from “me” being excited that a scam site got “me” a dozen reviews on Amazon and Goodreads over the space of a few weeks. I obviously did not make this testimonial, and also, bluntly, I wouldn’t be excited by a dozen Amazon/Goodreads reviews. “3 Days” pictured here, already has 3300 ratings/reviews on Amazon and over 4000 on Goodreads. I’m not now, nor have I been for some time, in the business of trying to plump up my Amazon/Goodreads review numbers. I certainly wouldn’t be recommending a service to do the same. They’re scams all the way down.
I suspect the people who regularly read here know that I or other well-known authors are not in the business of giving testimonials to sites that purport to “help” authors with reviews, but there are lots of aspiring writers who, shall we say, live in hope that there’s a shortcut to getting one’s name out there, and that something like this may be one of those shortcuts, and who might see my name, or the name of some other similarly notable author, and allow themselves to be convinced this sort of scam is a good idea. So this post is to tell them: No. Sorry, no. No author you have ever heard of is going to be scrabbling for Amazon or Goodreads reviews, and even if they were, they wouldn’t be doing it like this. Save your money.
— JS


What is The Time Traveler’s Passport? It’s an Amazon-exclusive anthology of six short stories — one written by me! — that have time travel as an integral part of their plot. Not even counting me, it’s a pretty grand line-up of authors: R.F. Kuang, Peng Shepard, Kaliane Bradley, Olivie Blake and P. Djèlí Clark. My story “3 Days, 9 Months, 27 Years” was released early on the Amazon “First Reads” program, but now the entire anthology is up and ready to be read.
Here’s the link to Amazon’s page for the anthology. If you have Amazon Prime or Kindle Unlimited, you can check out these stories at no additional cost; for everyone else you can buy the entire anthology for a nice low price, or pick and choose the individual stories. The stories also come with audio narration (mine performed by Malcolm Hillgartner), so you have options on how to take in the tale.
These are all excellent stories by fantastic authors (credit here to editor John Joseph Adams for putting it together), and well worth your time to check out. Enjoy!
— JS
These days, the most important meeting attendee isn’t a person: It’s the AI notetaker.
This system assigns action items and determines the importance of what is said. If it becomes necessary to revisit the facts of the meeting, its summary is treated as impartial evidence.
But clever meeting attendees can manipulate this system’s record by speaking more to what the underlying AI weights for summarization and importance than to their colleagues. As a result, you can expect some meeting attendees to use language more likely to be captured in summaries, timing their interventions strategically, repeating key points, and employing formulaic phrasing that AI models are more likely to pick up on. Welcome to the world of AI summarization optimization (AISO).
AI summarization optimization has a well-known precursor: SEO.
Search-engine optimization is as old as the World Wide Web. The idea is straightforward: Search engines scour the internet digesting every possible page, with the goal of serving the best results to every possible query. The objective for a content creator, company, or cause is to optimize for the algorithm search engines have developed to determine their webpage rankings for those queries. That requires writing for two audiences at once: human readers and the search-engine crawlers indexing content. Techniques to do this effectively are passed around like trade secrets, and a $75 billion industry offers SEO services to organizations of all sizes.
More recently, researchers have documented techniques for influencing AI responses, including large-language model optimization (LLMO) and generative engine optimization (GEO). Tricks include content optimization—adding citations and statistics—and adversarial approaches: using specially crafted text sequences. These techniques often target sources that LLMs heavily reference, such as Reddit, which is claimed to be cited in 40% of AI-generated responses. The effectiveness and real-world applicability of these methods remains limited and largely experimental, although there is substantial evidence that countries such as Russia are actively pursuing this.
AI summarization optimization follows the same logic on a smaller scale. Human participants in a meeting may want a certain fact highlighted in the record, or their perspective to be reflected as the authoritative one. Rather than persuading colleagues directly, they adapt their speech for the notetaker that will later define the “official” summary. For example:
The techniques are subtle. They employ high-signal phrases such as “key takeaway” and “action item,” keep statements short and clear, and repeat them when possible. They also use contrastive framing (“this, not that”), and speak early in the meeting or at transition points.
Once spoken words are transcribed, they enter the model’s input. Cue phrases—and even transcription errors—can steer what makes it into the summary. In many tools, the output format itself is also a signal: Summarizers often offer sections such as “Key Takeaways” or “Action Items,” so language that mirrors those headings is more likely to be included. In effect, well-chosen phrases function as implicit markers that guide the AI toward inclusion.
Research confirms this. Early AI summarization research showed that models trained to reconstruct summary-style sentences systematically overweigh such content. Models over-rely on early-position content in news. And models often overweigh statements at the start or end of a transcript, underweighting the middle. Recent work further confirms vulnerability to phrasing-based manipulation: models cannot reliably distinguish embedded instructions from ordinary content, especially when phrasing mimics salient cues.
If AISO becomes common, three forms of defense will emerge. First, meeting participants will exert social pressure on one another. When researchers secretly deployed AI bots in Reddit’s r/changemyview community, users and moderators responded with strong backlash calling it “psychological manipulation.” Anyone using obvious AI-gaming phrases may face similar disapproval.
Second, organizations will start governing meeting behavior using AI: risk assessments and access restrictions before the meetings even start, detection of AISO techniques in meetings, and validation and auditing after the meetings.
Third, AI summarizers will have their own technical countermeasures. For example, the AI security company CloudSEK recommends content sanitization to strip suspicious inputs, prompt filtering to detect meta-instructions and excessive repetition, context window balancing to weight repeated content less heavily, and user warnings showing content provenance.
Broader defenses could draw from security and AI safety research: preprocessing content to detect dangerous patterns, consensus approaches requiring consistency thresholds, self-reflection techniques to detect manipulative content, and human oversight protocols for critical decisions. Meeting-specific systems could implement additional defenses: tagging inputs by provenance, weighting content by speaker role or centrality with sentence-level importance scoring, and discounting high-signal phrases while favoring consensus over fervor.
AI summarization optimization is a small, subtle shift, but it illustrates how the adoption of AI is reshaping human behavior in unexpected ways. The potential implications are quietly profound.
Meetings—humanity’s most fundamental collaborative ritual—are being silently reengineered by those who understand the algorithm’s preferences. The articulate are gaining an invisible advantage over the wise. Adversarial thinking is becoming routine, embedded in the most ordinary workplace rituals, and, as AI becomes embedded in organizational life, strategic interactions with AI notetakers and summarizers may soon be a necessary executive skill for navigating corporate culture.
AI summarization optimization illustrates how quickly humans adapt communication strategies to new technologies. As AI becomes more embedded in workplace communication, recognizing these emerging patterns may prove increasingly important.
This essay was written with Gadi Evron, and originally appeared in CSO.



