I'd never been to a science-fiction convention until I became a professional writer.

But I do think it's important to remember that writers do not have a monopoly of wisdom on their books. They can be wrong about their own books, they can often learn about their own books.

I do, however, feel reasonably strongly the sense that the job of a piece of argumentative scholarly non-fiction is not the same as the job of a piece of fiction.

A lot of geeks are pale, bespectacled, wear dark clothing and don't get out much - the stereotype exists because it is very often true. I could pass for a non-geek but it would be inaccurate.

I love it when people want to interpret my books.

My Google-fu is strong.

I'd never understood the injunction not to regret anything, couldn't see how that wasn't cowardice.