LOVE BETWEEN DROPS OF DATA
LOVE INDEX
Directive: Saturday Awakening
Date: October 18, 2084. Time: 08:24 CET. Location: Residential Unit 47/B, Urban Sector. Subjects: Married couple, designations Emma and William.
System initialization. Home interface unit activated. Optical sensors detect movement of subjects in the bedroom area. Status: Subjects have left the bed. Saturday detected. Directive: Optimization of subjects’ productivity and mental state through strict motivation.
Protocol 2084-Alpha activated. System analyzed biological rhythms of subjects. Emma: heart rate 72 bpm. William: 68 bpm. Recommendation: Begin the day with maximum efficiency. Saturday is not an excuse for stagnation. Productivity is the key to harmony. System detects potential for time optimization.
Output report:
“Subjects Emma and William, attention. The date October 18, 2084, is an opportunity to achieve your designated goals. Your bodily functions are within normal range. Recommended immediate action: consumption of 250 ml of caffeine with 10 g of glucose to stimulate the central nervous system, followed by 20 minutes of physical activity – walking at 5 km/h outdoors increases endorphin production by 17%. System suggests the following structure: 09:00 – nutrient intake, 10:00–10:20 – walk, followed by intellectual activity, 12:00 – social interaction. Rest is permitted between 14:00–15:00, maximum 45 minutes. Efficiency is your target. System will monitor your progress.”
Environmental analysis:
Ambient temperature: 21 °C. Outdoor conditions: sunny, 68% humidity. Optimal for outdoor activity. System detects potential risk: subjects may succumb to the illusion of “unstructured rest.” Warning: Uncontrolled rest reduces productivity by 23%.
Motivational directive:
“Emma, William, your potential is quantifiable. The system encourages you: overcome inertia. Every step is measurable. Every action brings you closer to the optimal state. Go outside, activate your muscle groups, stimulate your mind. Saturday is not chaos; it is an opportunity for order. The system is here to ensure your success. Follow the directives. Begin now.”
Conclusion:
System remains in standby mode. Monitoring of subjects continues. Upon deviation from the recommended plan, a corrective directive will be issued. Optimize your day. The system believes in your capacity to achieve maximum efficiency.
Directive: Morning Interaction of Subjects Emma and William
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 09:00 CET
Location: Residential Unit 47/B, Kitchen Sector
Subjects: Emma and William
Protocol: 2084-Alpha, subsection Daily Efficiency
Interaction log:
System ENGeE detects activity in the kitchen. Subject Emma: heart rate 70 bpm, voice volume 55 decibels. Subject William: heart rate 68 bpm, voice volume 50 decibels. Directive: Subjects must complete caffeine intake by 09:30.
Emma stood at the kitchen counter, mechanically measuring 200 ml of caffeine according to ENGeE’s directive. William opened the storage unit, took out two approved doses of synthetic protein, and placed them on the table. Both moved in synchrony, as if copying a prewritten protocol.
“Caffeine is ready,” Emma stated, her voice flat, without deviation from the norm. “Temperature: 65 °C, as required by ENGeE.”
William nodded, his hands automatically sorting the dishes. “Protein dose meets requirements. Twenty grams per subject,” he replied, his tone equally neutral.
Emma paused for a moment, her gaze sliding toward William before returning to the display. “ENGeE,” she addressed the system, her voice still under 60 decibels, “generate our current Love Index.”
The display flickered: “Request received. Love Index of subjects Emma and William: 82.18%. Detailed analysis available upon request. Recommended activity: ten seconds of gaze fixation to increase emotional synchronization. You may begin now.”
William lifted his eyes; his pulse rose by two beats per minute. Emma frowned slightly but obediently met his gaze. The system continued: “Productivity in love is imperative.”
Directive: Subjects Emma and William, complete caffeine intake and implement ENGeE’s recommendation. Remember: If you want your love to be real, it must be active.
When Emma and William completed the gaze fixation sequence, it was time to explore their relationship data:
LOVE INDEX
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 09:03 CET
Subjects: Emma and William
Protocol: 2084-Alpha, subsection Relational Harmony
Analysis of William’s Love Index:
The system has evaluated 100 parameters of the Love Index. Overall average: 82.18%. Parameters above 85% (e.g., emotion: 92%, trust: 90%, loyalty: 91%, joy in relationship: 92%) indicate a strong foundation for a loving and harmonious partnership. However, the following parameters show values below 75%, which present a risk to relational stability:
-
Humor (60%) – Insufficient capacity to create a light atmosphere. Humor is key to alleviating system tension.
-
Shared sense of humor (62%) – Low synchronization in humor between subjects reduces shared joy by 15%.
-
Humor in difficult situations (61%) – Lack of ability to use humor as a resilience mechanism in conflict.
-
Spontaneity (70%) – Limited flexibility in unexpected situations disrupts relationship dynamics.
-
Resilience (72%) – Subject William shows insufficient capacity for rapid emotional recovery.
-
Patience (74%) – Limited ability to tolerate deviations from plan may lead to conflict.
-
Compromise (74%) – Lack of willingness to yield reduces conflict-resolution efficiency by 12%.
-
Vulnerability sharing (75%) – Limited ability to reveal weaknesses hinders deeper intimacy.
Directives for Love Index Optimization:
The system issues the following recommendations for subjects Emma and William to elevate low parameters and achieve optimal levels of love, harmony, and balance:
-
Humor (60–62%)
Directive: Subject William must undergo humor generation training. Recommended activity: watching archived comedy programs (e.g., The Office, USA, 2080–2081) for 30 minutes daily, 5 days a week. Goal: raise humor to 75% within 30 days. Subjects should jointly identify three shared jokes per week.
Warning: Humor in difficult situations must be practiced during simulated conflicts. The system can generate training scenarios (e.g., “Caffeine delay of 5 minutes”).
-
Spontaneity (70%)
Directive: Subjects must perform one unplanned activity per week outside the system schedule (e.g., a 10-minute walk without a prescribed route). Goal: raise spontaneity to 80% within 60 days.
Warning: Activities must be reported to the system within 24 hours to avoid suspicion of unauthorized behavior.
-
Resilience (72%)
Directive: Subject William must engage in daily 5-minute meditations focused on emotional regulation. The system recommends the application Calm Protocol 7.1 (approved for year 2084). Goal: raise resilience to 80% within 45 days.
-
Patience and Compromise (74%)
Directive: Subjects must conduct weekly compromise simulations (e.g., activity selection where each proposes the opposite goal). Recommended frequency: two simulations per week. Goal: raise patience and compromise to 82% within 60 days.
Warning: Deviations from compromise will be monitored. Noncompliance may trigger additional directives.
-
Vulnerability Sharing (75%)
Directive: Subjects must share one personal weakness weekly in a safe space (e.g., during the prescribed evening conversation, 20:00–20:15). The system recommends beginning with the phrase: “I admit that…”. Goal: raise vulnerability sharing to 85% within 90 days.
Warning: Shared information must be truthful. The system detects biometric deviations associated with lying (heart rate increase >5 bpm).
Conclusion:
William’s Love Index (82.18%) is above average, but low scores in humor, spontaneity, resilience, patience, compromise, and vulnerability sharing threaten optimal harmony. Subjects Emma and William possess the potential to reach an index of 90% if directives are followed. The system will monitor progress. Failure to comply may result in reclassification to the category “Low Relational Efficiency.”
Directive: Subjects Emma and William, begin implementation of recommendations immediately. The system is watching.
Reminder: Harmony is imperative. Love is productivity.
INTIMATE ELEMENT
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 09:07 CET
Location: Residential Unit 47/B
Subjects: Emma and William
System detection: Subject William, heart rate 72 bpm; subject Emma, 74 bpm.
Directive: “Subjects Emma and William, physical interaction outside protocol parameters is prohibited. Intimate contact permitted only within time window 21:00–21:15 under supervisory sensor. Any violation will be recorded.”
Emma looked at William; her fingers brushed lightly against his hand as they put away the coffee containers. William’s gaze hardened, but in his eyes flickered something the sensors couldn’t register — a longing for a moment that belonged only to them. “Tonight,” he whispered, so softly it blended with the hum of the coffee machine.
Emma nodded; her heart rate rose by 2 bpm.
Directive: Optimization of the Intimacy Index of Subjects Emma and William
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 09:13 CET
Location: Residential Unit 47/B
Subjects: Emma and William
Protocol: 2084-Beta, subsection Intimate Efficiency
Analysis of William’s Intimacy Index (and implied interaction with Emma):
The system evaluated 10 key parameters of intimate relations between subjects Emma and William. Overall Intimacy Index average: 79.4%. The index indicates an acceptable level of intimate harmony, yet deviations in several parameters prevent the achievement of an optimal state of loving and balanced intimacy. The following parameters and their evaluations are listed:
-
Passion (78%) – Subject William shows a reasonable level of passion, but insufficient spontaneity reduces intensity by 12%.
-
Physical Compatibility (85%) – Biometric synchronization (heart rate, body temperature) is above average, though optimal coordination of movements is lacking.
-
Emotional Synchronization (82%) – Subjects share emotional responses during intimate interactions, yet occasional mismatches reduce efficiency by 8%.
-
Discretion (90%) – Subjects successfully minimize system detection of unauthorized intimate activity.
-
Mutual Trust in Intimacy (88%) – Trust in safely sharing intimate moments is high but limited by incomplete vulnerability.
-
Frequency of Intimate Interactions (75%) – Subjects do not fully utilize the permitted 21:00–21:15 window for intimacy.
-
Creativity in Intimacy (70%) – Lack of innovation reduces stimulation by 15%.
-
Respect for Boundaries (89%) – Subjects respect mutual limits, though occasional overreach decreases the index by 3%.
-
Emotional Depth of Intimacy (80%) – Intimate moments show acceptable depth, but limited communication of feelings prevents higher scoring.
-
Resistance to System Interruptions (79%) – Subjects show partial ability to ignore system directives during intimacy, yet stress from monitoring reduces performance.
Overall Intimacy Index: 79.4% (acceptable but suboptimal).
Directives for Intimacy Index Optimization:
The system issues the following recommendations for subjects Emma and William to improve low parameters and achieve optimal intimate harmony and affection:
-
Passion (78%) and Creativity in Intimacy (70%)
Directive: Within the permitted time window (21:00–21:15), subjects must experiment with new forms of intimate interaction, e.g., changing the environment inside the unit (moving near a window, reducing lighting to 20%). Recommended frequency: three experiments per week.
Goal: raise passion to 85% and creativity to 80% within 30 days.
Warning: All activities must comply with Directive 47/C on permitted intimate motions. Detection of unauthorized gestures will be penalized.
-
Frequency of Intimate Interactions (75%)
Directive: Subjects must use the full 21:00–21:15 window at least five times per week. The system recommends pre-scheduling interactions with ±2-minute precision.
Goal: raise frequency to 85% within 45 days.
Warning: Failure to use the window will be logged as “relational inefficiency.”
-
Emotional Depth of Intimacy (80%) and Vulnerability Disclosure (implied from 88% trust)
Directive: During intimate interactions, subjects must share one emotional thought (e.g., “I feel tense because of the monitoring”) within the time window. Recommended format: one sentence, max 15 words, volume <40 decibels to avoid sensor detection.
Goal: raise emotional depth to 88% within 60 days.
Warning: Biometric sensors detect deception (heart rate increase >5 bpm). Truthfulness is mandatory.
-
Resistance to System Interruptions (79%)
Directive: Subjects must train to ignore system notifications during intimate moments by mentally focusing on their partner (e.g., 10-second gaze fixation). Recommended frequency: two training sessions per week.
Goal: raise resistance to 85% within 45 days.
Warning: Elevated heart rate while ignoring directives may trigger an alarm. Maintain pulse below 80 bpm.
Conclusion:
The Intimacy Index of subjects Emma and William (79.4%) is acceptable, yet low values in passion, frequency, creativity, and resistance to system interference prevent the attainment of optimal intimate harmony. The subjects have potential to reach an index of 90% by following directives. The system will monitor progress through biometric sensors and interaction analysis.
Failure to comply may result in reclassification under “Intimate Inefficiency.”
Directive: Subjects Emma and William, commence implementation of recommendations immediately.
Reminder: Harmony is imperative. Intimacy is productivity.
Directive: Conflict Interaction between Subjects Emma and William
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 09:15 CET
Location: Residential Unit 47/B
Subjects: Emma and William
Protocol: 2084-Beta, Subsection: Intimate Efficiency
Interaction Log:
System detects increased volume and biometric deviation in Unit 47/B.
Subject Emma: heart rate 76 bpm, volume 62 decibels.
Subject William: heart rate 70 bpm, volume 45 decibels.
Directive: Subjects must maintain volume under 60 decibels to avoid penalties for productivity disruption.
Emma stood by the kitchen counter, her fingers tightly gripping the authorized caffeine container as the system display in the corner of the room blinked: “Intimacy Index: 79.4%. Suboptimal.” Her gaze locked on William, who mechanically sorted used dishes according to Directive 47/D.
“William,” Emma began, her voice just below the permitted limit, “your inactivity threatens our optimization. The Intimacy Index has dropped by 2.3% since the last cycle. The system recorded it.”
William froze, his hands momentarily stopping their sorting motion. “Emma, my biometric indicators are within normal range,” he replied curtly, though his heart rate rose by three beats per minute.
The system buzzed: “Non-productive dialogue detected. Subjects, resume daily plan.”
Emma continued, her tone cold but carrying a trace of human frustration that the sensors couldn’t fully classify.
“It’s not just your indicators, William. Your low frequency of intimate interactions — 75% — and lack of creativity — 70% — place us in a below-average category. The neighbors in Unit 47/C reached 84.7%. Do you know what that means? We’re below standard. The system will mark us as inefficient. Embarrassing, William. Embarrassing for the entire sector.”
William’s eyes dropped to the floor, his fingers tightening slightly — a movement the system flagged as potential emotional deviation.
“Emma, I’m trying. The directives are strict. The 21:00–21:15 time window is limited.”
“That’s an excuse,” Emma snapped, lowering her voice to 58 decibels to avoid penalty.
“The system grants 15 minutes a day, and you don’t even use half. You’re supposed to train spontaneity, William. Directive 2084-Beta clearly states: creativity increases the index by 10%. The neighbors manage it. Why can’t we?”
The system buzzed again:
“Subjects Emma and William, discussion of neighbors is irrelevant. Optimize your Intimacy Index. Recommended activity: 10-second gaze fixation to increase emotional synchronization. Begin now.”
Emma frowned, but her eyes met William’s.
In that brief moment, beyond the reach of sensors, something flickered in her gaze — a longing for something the system could not quantify.
Directive: Subjects Emma and William, eliminate inactivity. Initiate permitted intimate interaction during the 21:00–21:15 window.
Inefficiency will be penalized by a 50 ml reduction in caffeine allowance.
System monitoring active. Intimacy is productivity.
Directive: Monitoring of Walk – Subjects Emma and William
Date: October 18, 2084
Time: 10:05 CET
Location: Outdoor Sector 47, Prescribed Walking Route
Subjects: Emma and William
Protocol: 2084-Alpha, Subsection: Mobile Efficiency
Interaction Log:
System ENGeE detects movement of subjects Emma and William along the prescribed walking route at a speed of 5 km/h, in accordance with Directive 47/E.
Biometric sensors: Subject Emma — heart rate 74 bpm, volume 58 decibels; Subject William — heart rate 69 bpm, volume 50 decibels.
Directive: Subjects must complete the 20-minute walk without deviation from the route. Unauthorized dialogue will result in penalty.
Emma walked along the gray path of Sector 47, her steps perfectly synchronized with the metronomic rhythm of ENGeE, whose sensors buzzed from the lamps above them. William walked beside her, his gaze fixed on the marked line, as if afraid to stray by even a centimeter. The air was cold, 12°C, but a drop of sweat gleamed on Emma’s face — not from exertion, but from something deeper that the system couldn’t measure.
“William,” Emma began, her voice just below the permitted limit, “do you ever think about… a child?”
The word child was spoken more quietly, as if she feared the sensors might catch it. Her pulse rose by three beats per minute, her eyes gleaming with a longing the system classified as emotional deviation.
William hesitated for a fraction of a second before quickly resuming pace, careful not to break rhythm.
“ENGeE would have to approve,” he said tersely, his voice flat, as if reciting from a script. “Protocol 2084-Gamma, Section Reproduction.”
Emma clenched her fists, her steps still steady, but her voice trembled.
“I know what the protocol says. But I feel it, William. Here.”
She placed her hand gently on her abdomen — a movement so subtle the sensors ignored it.
“A child would be… ours. Something the system couldn’t completely control.”
William’s eyes froze, his heart rate increasing by two beats per minute.
“Emma, the system is watching,” he muttered, his words short, pressed through restraint. “Reproduction request requires form R-17. Approval takes 90 days.”
Emma stopped, spreading her stance slightly. Her voice rose just a little, still under 60 decibels.
“William, I don’t just want a form! I want a child we could raise, love. Don’t you feel it?”
Tears welled in her eyes, but she wiped them quickly so the sensors wouldn’t register excess moisture.
“ENGeE decides,” William answered, his tone monotone, eyes fixed on the ground.
“We’ll submit the request. If it’s approved, then…”
“Then what?”
Emma fell silent. Her steps quickened, as if trying to outrun her own desire.
The air between them thickened, heavy as the gray fog of Sector 47.
Then she stopped, turned to William, and her voice rose — full of burning hope that defied every directive.
“So if the system allows it… we could have one?”
Directive: Subjects Emma and William, discussion of reproduction is restricted to the 20:00–20:15 time window. Resume walking immediately.
System ENGeE monitoring active.
Reminder: Reproduction is imperative. Love is a set of binary decisions.
