WELCOME TO THE INAUGURAL ISSUE OF VOICES FROM THE NET
WELCOME TO THE INAUGURAL ISSUE OF VOICES FROM THE NET
[Keep in mind, Wired #1 is now going for $50.00 American ;)]
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xx xx
xx V O I C E S xx
xx xx
xx f r o m xx
xx xx
xx t h e xx
xx xx
xx N E T . . . xx
xx xx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
C a n Y o u H e a r O u r V o i c e s ?
D o Y o u R e a d U s ?
There are a lot of folks with at least one foot in this complex region we
call (much too simply) "the net." There are a lot of voices on these wires.
From IRC to listservs, MUDspace to e-mail, Usenet group to commercial bbs
- all kinds of voices - loud and quiet, anonymous and well-known. And yet,
it's far from clear what it might mean to be a "voice" from, or on, the
net. Enter "Voices from the Net": one attempt to sample, explore, the
possibilities (or perils) of net.voices. Worrying away at the question.
Running down the meme. Looking/listening, and reporting back to you.
* * * ISSUE #1.1 * * *
This issue:
--VOICES CARRY
introductions, musings, ...
--TOM MADDOX
brief bio, followed by Q&A
--SIGNAL/NOISE
assorted trains of thought from IRC, a MOO, and e-mail
--A FEW MINUTES WITH... ANDY HAWKS
brief bio, followed by an essay
--A SHOUT IN THE DARK
conclusions? and other ramblings
--COMING ATTRACTIONS
preview issue #2
* * *
__VOICES CARRY__
Can you hear our voice?
People...? Do you read us?
Are we coming in loud and clear?
hmmmmm...
"Voices from the Net" - With a title like that, you know we're just
looking for trouble. Trouble of the most basic, definitional kind. With a
title like that, what could our zine be about? What are these "voices from
the net"?
Lean back, look away from your screen. Can you hear me? (You looked back.
Don't think that we don't know! ;-) If "bookish" falls in the MOO, and all
you get is the emote message:
--->bookish suddenly crashes to the floor
does he make a sound? At the risk of getting too literal, too
philosophical, let me ask again - What are these voices from the net?
The question is one of mediation, and it is of a familiar type.
Communication technologies, beginning(?) with writing and progressing(?!)
through VR, confront us with a range of mutations of the voice. They defy
the limitations in space and time that bound oral face-to-face
communication. So that the voice is "read" when it is "loud and clear."
Confusions of the ear and eye abound, particularly in cyberspace(s).
CountZer0 and I hold an impromptu editorial meeting by "finger"-ing and
"talk"-ing online. But my fingers only touch the keyboard of my Mac, and
those same fingers do the talking while I listen with my eyes. We need
never have fleshmet, spoken face-to-face, to produce "Voices from the
Net."
Confusions, contradictions, and paradoxes. I lean back, look away from my
screen. It's 3AM and very quiet. But most of us know how "noisy" even our
favorite virtual environments can get, how completely the "signal" can be
drowned.
Signal/noise. Sound/silence. What ARE these voices from the net? These are
the conundrums that will occupy us, which we will worry at with all the
monomaniacal intensity of a Usenet group. ;-) "Voices from the Net" is the
record of a search, an ongoing enquiry into the nature(?!) of our
net.voices.
We'll be starting close to home, with environments we know and
voices that are significant to us, but you can bet that we won't hang
around those regions exclusively. Already, we are moving/being moved into
new spaces. We're finding new voices. We want to "hear" what they have to say,
to "see" how they say it. And we want you to join us, to help the voices
carry. To help carry the voices from the net.
C'mon. All aboard! It'll be fun...
* * *
__TOM MADDOX__
Who is Tom Maddox? That's a question that requires a variety of
answers. (The kind of question we like at "Voices...") He is a published
author of science fiction stories. His first, "The Mind Like a Strange
Balloon," appeared in _Omni_ in 1985, and he has had others published in
_Omni_, _Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine_, and "small magazines and not so
small anthologies--including _Mirrorshades:The Cyberpunk Anthology_."
Maddox was among those first associated with the the term "cyberpunk"
and received special thanks--along with Bruce Sterling, Lewis Shiner, and
John Shirley--in William Gibson's _Neuromancer_. He has also written
literary criticism. His first novel, _Halo_, was published by Tor Books in
1991.
Maddox teaches literature and writing at Evergreen State College, in
Olympia, Washington. He describes his situation simply: "Good school,
good job."
He is married with two children, plays guitar and is a "regular" in
several online environments. And in his spare time...
Back - oh, a month or so ago - when "Voices from the Net" was little more
than a gleam in our collective eye, we put together a list of people who
might be willing to talk to us about life on the net. Tom Maddox appeared
very near the top of that list, for a variety of reasons that should
become clear. Among those reasons is his willingness to talk about issues
like "voices from the net." In his "spare time" he was gracious enough to
share his thoughts on a few questions...
<Voices> You expressed surprise that we had put you at the top of
>our list. Let's start there. Do you think of yourself as a
>"significant voice" on the net?
>What, then, would you consider a "significant voice"?
<Tom Maddox> Let me take your first two together. One of the most
interesting things about the net is that all voices are
potentially significant, all potentially insignificant. It's not
only a a functioning anarchy, it's also a pure democracy. A
significant voice is any voice that says something significant.
Which is neither to say nor imply that this makes everything
wonderful. Anyone can achieve significance by being an
unspeakable pain in the ass, of course--by posting enough
abuse or gibberish or simply by sitting hour after hour spewing
the first thing that comes to mind.
But I believe in an uncensored net. Moderated groups are fine in
their place, but unmoderated groups are, at least from this
point of view, still more important. As to good taste,
consideration, and allied virtues, they're fine, but freedom of
speech is finer still.
<Voices> More generally, what parts of the net do you frequent. Why
>those, and why not others?
<Tom Maddox> "The net" is ambiguous. Which net or which part of it? For
instance--
On Usenet, I frequent rec.arts.books, alt.cyberpunk, some of the
Mac groups, misc.writing, and a bunch more that I scan at high
speed: alt.hypertext, sf.written, eff.talk, and others. Depending
on what's happening topically (the goings on at EFF in the early
part of the year, introduction of the Clipper Chip proposal,
etc.) I might drop in on ones I don't ordinarily look at.
More generally, on the Internet I also read and now again
contribute to several mailing lists--on Pynchon,
deconstruction, artificial life, other odds and sods. I check in
on various machines by ftp or telnet: eff.org, for instance, or
places like sumex or umich that have new Mac software. And
when something new comes up that I hear about--like the JPEG
images from a Library of Congress exhibit from the Vatican
Library--I check those out.
On the WELL I mostly lurk--I've never been able to adapt to the
social structure there, for reasons that utterly elude me.
On GEnie, I look at some of the Mac groups and a very few of
the sf groups from time to time. I almost never say anything
there, for reasons you might infer from what I say below.
On BMUG (the Berkeley Mac Users' Group, one of the great ones
in the country) I look at the new software and some of the
discussions of books and free speech.
Etcetera.
Why these? They amuse or inform me more than others, and I
can cope with their volume. I used to frequent talk.bizarre
when I first started reading Usenet, and wouldn't mind reading
it still, if it were about one-hundredth its usual volume.
<Voices> Do you think that there are certain areas on the net where
>it is easier to be heard? What makes those spaces more
>"speaker friendly"?
<Tom Maddox> Low volume spaces, chatty spaces, *regulated* spaces.
For instance, GEnie's sf groups are both chatty and censored:
nobody can call anyone a motherfucker or engage in repeated,
focused abuse. So new users can kind of scuff their toes and
say "ah, shucks," and join right in. Violations of community
etiquette are gently reprimanded, and so on--stuff that would
get you nuked on Usenet is dealt with quite kindly. Moderated
groups on Usenet have some of this quality, though even they
tend more toward demanding on-topic discussions and some
substance, while the chatty groups on GEnie (or Fido [FIDO?
PHYDOUGH?], for that matter) wander all over the place
All of which pretty much bores me, I'm sorry to say. I prefer
the freefire zone of Usenet, even though I've had my own ass
shot off while wandering through it at various times.
<Voices> Given the enormity of the net, how significant are even the
>voices that get heard in a single sphere? Is that enormity a
>weight that has to be carried by each communicator or is the
>interconnection, and the nearly global "reach" it provides,
>more than enough compensation for net-inertia?
<Tom Maddox> Well, yeah, it's a big net. "Single sphere" I don't
get. A newsgroup? A "region" of the net such as Usenet?
Each of us is a small voice sounding among millions (billions?
how many messages constitute, for instance, Usenet at a given
moment, and how do you count them?), so it's possible to feel
quite unimportant, but then again each of us *is* unimportant
in the larger scheme of things, so I look at this aspect of the
net as a reality check.
In other words, the global scope of the net is one of its most
important characteristics and is especially salutory for
Americans, who tend to believe the world centers on the U.S.
<Voices> How much effect can this rather ephemeral form of
>communication have on "the world," either in some global or
>local sense? Why try to be an audible voice on the net?
<Tom Maddox> Because despite our relative unimportance, many of us
really do want to be heard. What effect will we have? The historical
jury's still out on that one, I think. As a writer of fiction, this
is a question I've had to think about quite a few times, and I
still don't know the answer. Why make up stories for people
and go to a great deal of trouble to make them as interesting,
imaginative, intelligent, and so on as I can? I certainly can't
prove that doing so is of particular benefit to the world at
large. Why post something interesting to rec.arts.books or
bother to correct a particularly egregious lie or
misstatement? Why risk ridicule, reprimand, or flames?
Why not? It's only rock and roll, so fuck it: say what you mean
and learn from your experiences. I am either simple or stupid
enough to believe that I've actually learned some important
lessons from the net--about public argument, effective
rhetoric in an electronic medium, and so on.
Also, lessons about what kinds of experiences I do and don't
want to have, on the net and elsewhere. In my early days, a few
years back (about five, actually), I got involved in some fairly
outrageous flame wars. Those were interesting for a while;
the emotional situations they generated were new to me. But
they got old: they're simply too much damned trouble in most
instances. They require too much investment of energy and
time and thought. But I'm glad I went through them because I
feel they taught me something about myself, other people, the
net, and so on. And I quite enjoyed the smell of napalm some
mornings in alt.cyberpunk.
<Voices> The net is growing rapidly, and that seems likely to
>complicate an already complex situation. How do you think the
>net's expansion will affect the average person's chance of
>being heard on the net?
<Tom Maddox> The larger the net, the more it demands good writing--
intelligent, informed, imaginative writing, also writing free
from the kinds of technical miscues that so often characterize
writing on the net. In short, writing becomes more public,
more like writing for a journal, a magazine or newspaper, less
like writing to a friend or small group of people. Somewhere
along here the usual net semi-literacies--"their" for "there,"
"your" for "you're," it's" for "its" and so on--become real
obstacles to getting heard, just as they are when someone
submits an essay or story to a magazine. And chatty
misinformation gets correction in a hurry (or, failing that,
starts a firestorm of charge and counter-charge, which is not
characteristic of the net, by the way, as some people assert,
but of humanity, as witness the equally bizarre flame wars
that occur in such august journals as _The New York Review of
Books_).
Some quite intelligent and net-aware people treat the net as a
casual chat, so they don't bother to proofread what they post
or to rewrite it. I find this attitude quite bizarre, given that
for many people the net is the biggest audience they will ever
have.
Looked at positively, the increase in the size of the net means
that all anyone needs is a computer and modem and a little wit
to get heard by millions of people.
The "average person" I'm not sure about. I don't know who that
is or what he or she is capable of. Also, as a long-time
teacher, I'm committed to the idea that everyone can escape
the ugly imputation of being average.
<Voices> Along these same lines, do you think that as the net
>becomes less-and- less a place just for the "cool few" there
>will be an increase in the kind of defensiveness about
>territory that we already see? Might this tend to inhibit new
>voices?
<Tom Maddox> Bigger net, more inhibition, for reasons I've just talked about.
It's hard to stand up before a big audience and say your piece.
However, it's easier to do so electronically than to do so in
person.
<Voices> When you're on the net--as Tom Maddox, Man & Beast--
>posting to alt.whatever, is that the Tom Maddox that goes to
>the grocery store, or do you play a role? Does the online
>environment "naturally" lead to the development of net-
>personas, or at least facilitate it?
<Tom Maddox> Depends whom you talk to, and when. Some days I believe that
the person who does the writing (music making, painting,
programming, whatever) is not the same person who goes
shopping and so on, but I have no strong argument to support
this belief--it comes from reflection on my own writing and
second-hand knowledge about others'. In short, that's how it
feels to me.
Besides, the net is a new medium (or several of them), one in
which I think we can see empirically that persona creation
occurs easily (if not naturally, whatever that word means in
this context).
However, in this regard I've heard from people who just don't
understand how anyone could regard a net.persona as
something different from who that person is. Such people
believe in a coherent, unified personality, I suppose, and I just
don't. I believe, rather, that we are all mixed bags of
contradictory impulses, actions, possibilities. On the net we
manifest one set (or more) of these, in the grocery store
another.
<Voices> As a writer, you're associated in many minds with
>"cyberpunk." Clearly, a lot has changed since you wrote
>"Snake-Eyes" with regard to what that term could mean. How
>do you understand your relationship to "cyberpunk" these
>days? Could you respond to the oft-heard cry that it
>(whatever it is) is being spoiled by commercialization?
<Tom Maddox> No one can control the evolution of a meme. Like similar
terms before it ("surrealism," for instance), cyberpunk has turned out
to have a certain viability in the memetic habitats of
worldwide culture.
I can't say I've really been surprised by this since the early
days of _Neuromancer_'s success, because it seemed obvious
early on that Gibson had quite unwittingly tapped into an
emerging set of phenomena of some importance. In those days
he'd call me and tell me the latest news, and I'd laugh and say,
"Yeah, the Russian program is still running," a Gibsonian
reference you can explain if you wish.
And of course everything is commercialized, nothing is sacred,
everything is permitted: total commodification, the triumph of
world capitalism. If you don't like it, try to change it in the
best ways you can, but there's no point in pretending it ain't so
or in pissing and moaning as if there were a chance it could be
otherwise for cyberpunk when all around there's evidence to
the contrary.
Of course, on the net, in groups such as alt.cyberpunk or
mailing lists such as Future-Culture, young folks are in the
process of developing their selves (or personae, if you wish)
and get quite worried when what seemed very hip and bleeding
edge suddenly appears in _Time_, but this is not my concern.
The process by which hip culture constantly redefines itself in
an era of total commodification is anthropologically
interesting, to say the least, but those of us who have more-
or-less fixed repertoires of self simply can't get bent out of
shape because for the nth time the commodity culture is feeding at
the throat of hipness.
Cyberpunk hasn't been spoiled, it's simply evolved in the ways
characteristic of organisms in its environments.
<Voices> _Halo_ shows the influence of a variety of postmodern
>philosophers and artists. How important is that sort of
>thought to your vision? For example, you cite Donna Haraway
>at least twice in the novel. Do you see her notion of the
>"cyborg" as useful to understanding our contemporary state,
>perhaps particularly when we're plugged into the net?
<Tom Maddox> Maybe. To coopt a Bruce Sterlingism, Donna Haraway's a
heavy dude, so to speak. (Though a kind and funny one. I sent her a
copy of _Halo_, feeling I owed her at least that much, and she
said she liked it when I met her in Seattle. So she's
*obviously* a woman of taste.)
Anyway, I don't know that the notion of the cyborg has much
depth in the context of net.culture. She applies it to
contemporary feminist theory, which is a very sly tactical
move on her part. She's arguing against the notion of the
"goddess," you see, and she's also using the idea as a wedge
into the complex of anti-scientific and technophobic ideas
that dominate so much of feminism.
But with regard to pomo luminaries in general (Baudrillard, for
instance, whom I also quote), I figure the best way to treat
them is the way they treat everything else: rip them off and
run and don't worry. Sort of a semiotic variation on "kill them
all, the Lord will know His own."
I'll continue to do this so long as I find it interesting.
<Voices> Ken Kesey has said, "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a
>seismograph." As a writer and net-denizen, do you see
>yourself more in the lightning rod category? Is that a virtue?
<Tom Maddox> Seems to me that such claims are arrogant. Sure, we may
want to be leading edge prophetic voices telling of our experiences
with forked fire, but we may just be lightning bugs. As
writers, we do the best we fucking can, I'll confess to that
much. And as Dorothy Parker said, one of our great sorrows
will be that it is the best we can do.
<Voices> Finally, are you working on anything currently that you
>want to crow about?
<Tom Maddox> Crow? No, but I'll talk a little. I'm working on a novel
whose title was _Wildlife_ until the outline got sold to Tor Books,
who have a novel in the can with a similar title, so I'm using
_LA 2033_ as a working title. Guess what it's about. Well, in
addition to the obvious, it concerns artificial life, the
panopticon, and the fall from grace of several privileged
people. I'll finish it as soon as I can, which will probably be a
couple of years.
I've got a story almost done called "Their Worlds and Starry
Skies" that is a very different sort of thing for me, almost a
fantasy, really, though based on quantum mechanics at some
level.
And my last _Omni_ story, "Gravity's Angel," has just been
reprinted in Gardner Dozois's _Best of the Year in Science
Fiction," which makes me happy.
Also, my monthly column in _Locus_, "Reports from the
Electronic Frontier," continues to hold my interest, and folks
have said kind things about it.
Finally, the Capital City Playhouse of Austin, Texas is planning an
adaptation of "Snake Eyes," my story in _Mirrorshades_. It is being
adapted and directed by Jessica Kubzansky, who usually works out of Los
Angeles. It is being presented with some sort of hot shit, high tech
interface that I don't understand at all, apparently under the
auspices of Eyecon Robot Group of Austin.
I talked once with Ms. Kubzanksy on the phone, who seems to me to have very
solid ideas about dramatizing the story.
They are planning to present the play around the end of July.
Tom Maddox
* * *
__SIGNAL/NOISE__
Signal/noise: the ratio between the useful information in a given environment
and the useless nonsense that inevitably accompanies it, even threatens to
drown it out. It's a useful measure, as long as you don't need to reduce
it to a number or something. But always remember: one net.entity's signal
is another's noise. And an environment which one person finds objectionably
noisy may seem serene to someone else. There are many voices out there -
many kinds of voices - and many environments that affect how those voices
appear to other folks across the wires. What follows is a first dip into
the ocean of such voices, presented in such a way as to preserve the feel
of the particular environment. Much of it was generated on the spot in
realtime interactive settings, and it has that mix of exciting
spontenaity and confusion. It's up to you to decide what's signal and what's
noise.
VOICES FROM MOOSPACE: We - that's CountZer0 and bookish - conducted our first
group interview on a MOO (Multi-User Dungeon (MUD) Object-Oriented) that we
frequent. It was rather a spur-of-the-moment affair. A group of our friends
- thoughtful folk - had gathered and we just decided to go for it. The
group didn't disappoint us. The discussion lasted for several hours,
although by the end we had moved very far afield from our initial topic.
The resulting text is not the most user-friendly of narratives. MOOspace
can be a confusing place.But that did little to silence the voices in this
particular corner of the 'net. Look:
Interview Room
A spacious place with comfortable seats for all. You can hardly resist the
urge to sit and answer odd questions.
You see Bookish, CountZer0, Greymalkin, xero
.oO<and listen...>
Heinrich teleports in.
Heinrich waves
Simone enters obediently after Heinrich.
Greymalkin [to Heinrich]: hey there
CountZer0 says, "did anyone here get our new announcement?"
Greymalkin says, "which one?"
Heinrich [to Greymalkin]: Hey, hey!
CountZer0 [to Bookish]: did we send it to these folx?
Heinrich says, "I didn't get dinko!"
xero says, "the announcement about the net.interviews?"
xero says, "I'm quite interested in that!!!!"
Heinrich says, "Net interviews?"
Bookish [to Heinrich]: yep
CountZer0 says, "hey guys, can we ask you all some questions"
Heinrich . o O (I'm being setup!)
Greymalkin is available for questioning
xero says, "sure"
Heinrich says, "Whatever."
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: we have a new e zine
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: Voices from the Net
Heinrich says, "Ahhh."
CountZer0 says, "well some questions then, it would be nice if all of you
could answer"
Heinrich says, "Who's got the copyright on this?"
Heinrich smiles
xero says, "do we have to sign virtual releases?"
CountZer0 says, "is this where you spend most of your time on the net or do
you do other things?"
Bookish hands out virtual releases
Greymalkin says, "sign here: x___________________________"
CountZer0 hands out virtual pens
xero signs his virtual release
Heinrich says, "I do lots of 'things'!"
Bookish [to Heinrich]: such as....
Heinrich scrawls something
Greymalkin says, " x___Greymalkin____________"
Heinrich says, "On the net or in RL?"
xero says, "most of my time on the net now is in here"
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: net.time
Bookish [to xero]: why is that?
Bookish [to Heinrich]: on the net
Heinrich says, "50-50 here and in gophers."
Greymalkin spends most of his net.time here
CountZer0 says, "to reiterate , why here?"
xero [to Bookish]: I like the fooling around with the environment here, and
I like the conversation and the fairly constant self-reflexivity here
Heinrich says, "As to why here--because of excellent folks like you!"
Heinrich smiles
Bookish blushes
xero smiles
Greymalkin says, "similar to xero's answer, I like being able to have some
direct influence over the environment, and the crowd here is a pretty
terrific bunch
Bookish says, "do ya'll think of yourselves as having a 'voice' on the net?"
Greymalkin has nothing on the net except a voice!
xero says, "I think of myself as being a voice, but it is somewhere between
writing letters and using the telephone and face-to-face communication
Heinrich says, "A voice implies power and I've little power here if power is
Net-knowledge."
CountZer0 [to hein:]: well what do you think that means
Greymalkin says, "the only way I can impact the net is through ascii... in a
sense, my voice here in a world of text..."
CountZer0 says, "yes but so many people can see that ascii"
xero nods
Bookish [to all]: how significant do you think our voices are here?
Greymalkin says, "exactly.. and thus my impact on the net... All I can hope
is that the memes I throw out there are fairly successful at spreading..
if so then my influence is maximized, if not, I am nothing more than
noise and wasted bandwidth.."
xero says, "For me the voices--the ascii streams--are about the most
significant part as everything else is a fun, malleable adventure-game-
type thing, but the interaction with words connected with RL people is the
best
CountZer0 says, "do you all see the Net as being a great equalizer?"
Heinrich [to CountZer0]: I use gophers for info on RL political activism. I
don't feel the 'power' on gophers as much as in here.
CountZer0 says, "as far as your voice is as "loud" as anyone else's"
Heinrich [to CountZer0]: "NO.
xero [to CountZer0]: in what way as an equalizer
Greymalkin says, "sure, you can have as much bandwidth as you care to
waste on rant, spew or whatever... it's there for the taking.."
Heinrich says, "Knowledge=power is especially evident on the Net."
CountZer0 says, "you all have the same power here sa much as
president@whitehouse.gov.."
Greymalkin says, "moreso on the net I think..."
xero says, "sometimes the jargon and abbreviations seem elitist, but after
you catch on to them, they save time, but it can get cacophonous and if
someone is a jerk..."
Heinrich [to CountZer0]: That's a red herring!
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: how so?
Heinrich says, "The Prez's power is dependent on the knowledge he can
garner from programmers around him and Net semi-theorist like Gore...."
Heinrich says, "I, on the other hand, am a one-person show"
Bookish [to Heinrich]: but what about that power to explore and organize
activist alternatives?
Heinrich says, "Knowledge=Power."
Cayenne has arrived.
< connected: Cayenne. Total: 14 >
Greymalkin says, "the apparent limitation is really overestimated I think..."
Cayenne says, "Hi, people!"
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: yes?
xero waves to cayenne
CountZer0 waves
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: feel free to jump on in here
Heinrich says, "This is going too fast. That's a question that I can't answer
right now."
Cayenne says, "What's going on?"
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: what does it mean to you to have a voice on the net?
Heinrich [to CountZer0]: But it is a v. good question!
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: c'mon now's your big chance
Heinrich says, "No, I need more time to think about that one. Sorry!"
Heinrich [to CountZer0]: Thanks anyway.
Cayenne says, "Do you mean the virtuality of our voices here, or the
metaphoric use of voice as in "having a say" (although that's the same
metaphor...)"
CountZer0 [to Heinrich]: can you email me an answer
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: either or both
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: just spew
CountZer0 [to Greymalkin]: but is the bandwidth too ephemeral to truly
accomplish anything?
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: At its simplest, or the most simple aspect of my
response, I like the voice I have on the net, both its virtuality and its
potentialities.
Greymalkin says, "no... no more ephemeral than the human spirit..."
Cayenne says, "I know that simple liking isn't very theoretically
sophisticated, but nevertheless..."
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: and getting more complex?
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: what would you say are the potentialities?
Cayenne says, "Some of the potentialities that excite me are the fluidity of
identity and self-presentation, the leveling of certain tokens of power..
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: talk to me about those power tokens..
Cayenne says, "at the same time, I'm well aware that who gets access is
already a question of privilege."
Cayenne says, "power tokens like age, like professional status, which are
rather invisible here,"
Cayenne says, "as well as tokens like class and gender and race, which are
probably less invisible, being involved in self-presentation as well."
CountZer0 [to xero]: yes, but how widespread is a post to usenet?
xero [to CountZer0]: the voices travel far and they are varied and that is
good
Heinrich waves
Heinrich teleports out.
Bookish says, "Do you feel you have more or less 'voice' here than you do in
RL?"
Bookish says, "is this an empowering environment?"
xero says, "More in some ways and less in others."
Greymalkin says, "yes!"
CountZer0 [to xero]: explain?
Bookish [to Greymalkin]: which?
Bookish smiles
Greymalkin [to Bookish]: yes, empowering...
Cayenne says, "I often feel I have less voice, because of the narrow
bandwidth, but more control over the voice I have."
Bookish loves the interface ; )
xero [to CountZer0]: I can say full sentences and not be interrupted, and
that's more, but less in that I can't use my RL voice and body when I speak
Cayenne says, "What I find exciting isn't so much *how* I can say what I
say (i.e., more/less voice, the interface) but rather who I can say it to."
xero [to Cayenne]: that's great! I think that's what I love about this.
Cayenne says, "and the immediacy and disparateness and distance over
which I can talk to people."
CountZer0 [to all]: how different is your net voice from your RL voice?
xero says, "annihilator of space and time--(it was the telegraph)"
Cayenne says, "(although I do like the "sound" of the voice I have
here, and I love the interface too!)"
Cayenne smiles
Greymalkin says, "I'm a baritone in RL, here just an 8 point font of your
choice..."
Greymalkin smiles
CountZer0 grins
CountZer0 [to Greymalkin]: c'mon you know what I mean
xero says, "its just one of my voices, one for academic stuff, one for fun, one
for film stuff, one for tv, one for radio, one for face-to-face, one for
phone,..."
xero smirks
Greymalkin says, "you mean content... I'm probably a bit more outspoken
here than at work, but all in all, I'd say the content of my message is
similar on and off the net"
xero says, "different voices for different places, different moods, different
social situations"
Cayenne says, "My net voice is much like my RL voice, I think. I wonder,
sometimes, though, of what impression you get from my presentation. How
much of what I think of as my RL voice, unreflectively, is my physical
presence, my physical body? And is the net voice that I think is like my
RL voice actually very different in important ways because you don't see
what I look like, how I carry myself, how I move, how I talk with my
hands, etc."
xero nods
xero realizes that he didn't *really* nod, but just typed that he did
Greymalkin says, "true... you get less non-verbal feedback o the net... no
looks that say "where did YOU get off the bus?"
xero thinks--is there a difference to everyone else?
Bookish [to xero]: "sure...and i can 'read' your nonverbals here too
xero [to Bookish]: but the nonverbals are under tight, conscious control by
us
xero says, "not like in RL, at least not most of the time"
Greymalkin [to Bookish]: only the one's that are expressed though... you
don't get the un/subconscious communication that you get from a
fleshmeet
CountZer0 [to all]: do you all find yourself using terms like by the way
etc..in rl?
Bookish says, "right, i was talking about this textual experience"
CountZer0 [to all]: I mean does this effect rl as much as rl effects this?
Greymalkin often wiggles his fingers on an imaginary keyboard while
talking...
xero says, "I don't use by the way, btw"
xero [to CountZer0]: ooh, you're playing with my head
Cayenne says, "Well, here's a small example of what I mean. I speak rather
quickly. I used to speak more quickly, especially when I was an adolescent,
I think because as some level I assumed that people didn't want to hear me,
so I tried to take up as little room in their ears as possible. Here,
whatever vestige of that self-effacing speech habit I have is washed out
by the effect of typing speed, which is probably completely unrelated. I
may think that part of my voice is that speech characteristic, but it's
actually only a c"
Cayenne says, "it's actually only a characteristic of my RL speech, not my
net speech."
Greymalkin [to CountZer0]: actually I think its very difficult to draw the
line between here and RL...
xero [to CountZer0]: do you draw the line between the telephone and rl?
CountZer0 [to Greymalkin]: well where would you draw it?
Greymalkin [to CountZer0]: after all... in RL I'm sitting at my keyboard
conversing with you
Cayenne says, "I've picked up net habits in things like writing a note to my
husband to tell him I'll be home late; I'll use :-)'s, for example."
xero [to CountZer0]: or a handwritten letter?
CountZer0 [to xero]: I want to know where you all draw the line
Cayenne says, "No, I don't draw a line between the telephone and RL. It *is
RL."
xero laughs, his 4 year old daughter sends smileys in e-mail to her dad
Greymalkin says, "and in VR the only difference is peripheral.."
Cayenne says, "One thing I notice is how quiet it actually is, conversing
here.
Greymalkin says, "seems pretty noisy to me..."
Cayenne says, "I mean, the only noise that's actually meeting my ears is the
clicking of keys on the keyboard."
xero [to CountZer0]: The roleplaying aspect makes the MOO slightly
different, but I don't really draw a line as there are RL folks reading and
writing this.
xero says, "the silence gets me too"
CountZer0 [to all]: so it's just another facet of rl
Cayenne says, "I feel like I'm hearing voices, but occasionally I kind of rise
up out of the net context and realize it's completely quiet."
xero says, "sometimes I imagine voices"
CountZer0 [to all]: a different form of consensual reality?
xero says, "just like tv or telephone or radio or photography--you learn the
conventions and naturalize them"
Greymalkin says, "sure... the terminal I'm using is real, the people I am
conversing with are real, the net over which we converse is real... I can
drive nails through all of them..."
Cayenne says, "I think of it like reading a novel--the voices in a novel
sometimes fill my head, and then I lift my head up from the book and
realize it's quiet."
xero says, "but when the novel is really good you forget that you are alone
with marks on a piece of paper and when you take a breather, you're
alone"
Cayenne 's last comment was in relation to silence in net conversations, not
CountZer0's last question
Cayenne [to xero]: Right, exactly.
Greymalkin says, "even the virtual space we create for ourselves here is
real in the sense of stored electrons..."
CountZer0 says, "can voices on the net affect you as much as rl voices
then?"
CountZer0 says, "can you make as close a friend?"
CountZer0 says, "etc...."
xero says, "what makes it real is how it is thought of, created by the words
that surround the objects that are numbers"
Cayenne says, "I think of virtual contexts as part of RL, in one sense, like
telephones; as xero said you learn the conventions and naturalize them."
Greymalkin says, "and if we call it artificial, how is more artificial than the
environment we wake and live and eat and sleep in?"
Greymalkin says, "to cz sure... perhaps even more so.."
Cayenne says, "at the same time, I also think of the net as almost like a
game, a microcosm of RL the way when kids play house it's a microcosm of
RL."
CountZer0 [to all]: so grey thinks a voice from the net can be powerful,
what about the rest of you?
Greymalkin knows
Cayenne says, "a re-enactment, a miniaturized reflection, of RL."
xero says, "voices on the net can effect you as much as rl voices as much as
words on a page by someone who is separated from you by space and time
can affect you, they may be dead, but the words and the thoughts that they
trigger remain"
Cayenne says, "I think it can be empowering. Is that powerful? Does the
feeling of being empowered mean you're more powerful? I don't know,
that's a whole piece in itself."
xero says, "but, you can tilt this mirror to change the reflection and the
inflection"
Cayenne [to xero]: yes, and in other ways is
Cayenne [to xero]: it's a funhouse mirror, already altered.
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: well then is there power to a voice from the net
and is it more or less or the same as power in rl??
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: Yes, or stammering, actually (stuttering is
repeating sounds, stammering is repeating words or pieces of words)
Greymalkin [to Cayenne]: I'm inclined to take a step back and agree with
you.. the power has been there all along, empowerment is more a
realization of our own potential and choosing to act on that realization..
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: but we learn to hear through
stuttering/stammering, whereas it's...
xero says, "the moment when you say, "hey, what I can say and do has some
sort of effect on others""
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: harder to hear the second half of a sentence when
it's been delayed (and I swear this one was accidental!)
Cayenne says, "I think stuttering is more like typos. Sentences left half-
dangling seems to me to be more like narcolepsy or something."
CountZer0 [to all]: to repeat, is there power to a voice from the net?
what is it? and is it more, less or the same as rl? potential?
xero says, "there is the bizarre, parallel conversations here where one
sentence always seems to be slightly behind and you respond to the first
before the second one comes in and then you have to change your
response"
Cayenne knows what xero means and sometimes finds it dizzying.
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: I don't think I can answer the question quite as
stated because I need to ask what kind of power?
xero says, "there is more power in that the voice is stripped of most of the
physical stigma of race, class, gender, and that the words speak for
themselves"
CountZer0 [to Cayenne]: power to be heard and understand, power to make a
difference in anything
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: Some kinds of power, yes, there is definitely power
to a net voice, different and more than RL. WRT [with relation to?] other
kinds of power, I think there's a lot about net voices that are chimerical.
Cayenne [to CountZer0]: well, make a difference in what? In the bombing
in Somalia or Bosnia? I think that this all, as fun as it is, does not
provide power.
#####
VOICES FROM IRC (INTERNET RELAY CHAT): IRC is a "place" where individuals
from all around the world come together on "channels" to "chat" or
interact with each other in a bare bones, stripped down, realtime
environment. What better place, we thought, to gather some voices. So we
made our own channel, put out an open invitation, and let nature take its
course. Here's what we got...
Welcome to IRC channel #voices
<CountZer0> ok let me set my logfile
<CountZer0> you all know why we're here right?
<KromeKing> yup
<Ginster> well, sort of
<aron> almost
<CountZer0> we're gonna ask you some questions and we want you all just to
+spew
<scotto> i assume you have slipcovers.
<scotto> ha.
<Ginster> ok
<KromeKing> hehe
<CountZer0> the rooms just a rental so we don't care
<Ginster> s p e w . . .
<andy_> =)
<CountZer0> ok #1
<CountZer0> Is Irc where you hang out most of the time? If not, where?
* KromeKing rubs his hands together in anticipation.
<scotto> I hang out on mailing lists most of the time.
<andy_> CountZer0 - in Whole Life or net.life?
<CountZer0> on the net..
<KromeKing> yeah, when I'm not deep within my mailbox I'm here.
<scotto> Ah -- in real life, I tend to hang out in theme parks.
<Ginster> irc = always running while I do mail
<andy_> irc, hell yeah.....
<jsitz> well, in real life I am found poolside...but my best time of the day
+is on irc
<Ginster> & the net runs in the background while I write
<andy_> irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc =)
<bookish> Why here, folx?
<aron> ummm, well I am logged into irc most of the time, but most often
+away, and working in another window, one of which is also mail.
<andy_> bookish - REALTIME
<andy_> "if it's not REALTIME it's CRAP!" =)
<KromeKing> bookish: realtyme is just so appealing.
<KromeKing> faster feedback
<andy_> relatively more synchronicity
<jsitz> realtime human contact
<aron> talk is realtime, irc has membrane, thin membrane though, like sex
+with a condom
<scotto> just because it's REALTIME doesn't mean it is wonderfully
+CONTENT-ful.
<KromeKing> true
<jsitz> expression flows smoother than in mail...points are clearer
<CountZer0> scotto: why lists then?
<andy_> scotto - yeah, but noone said anything about content yet...=)
<KromeKing> more content in mail, but more FEELING in irchaos, imho
<scotto> lists include the entire community, pretty much all the time,
+provided you want to read.
<scotto> irc automatically means some people will always miss some other
+people.
<aron> scotto, I have seen long posts all over the net without one iota of
+content
<scotto> i agree; i can delete those a lot easier than I can here
<scotto> hard to avoid some ninny (heh) in irc who remains content free
<CountZer0> What does it mean to have a "voice from the net" and do you
think
+you have one?
<aron> you said from the net, from the net to where??
<Ginster> i have a voice _on_ the net when I am on the net, but no echoes
+off the net..
<CountZer0> Do you think you have a voice on the net?
<scotto> how would you hear me if i didn't?
<CountZer0> what does it mean to have this voice?
<jsitz> yeah, no matter how small my voice is...it plays a part in the whole
<Ginster> yeah
<scotto> it means, on some level, a willingness to impose your POV on the
+flux
<voidmstr> its strange that my net.voice turned out to be not words but
+pictures
<Ginster> or play with the flux
<Ginster> or make the flux
<jsitz> it means that people are reaching out to other people....ideas get
+bounced around....you get to project what you are thinking to an audience
+without a megaphone
<KromeKing> be the flux
<scotto> The Flux: just do it.
<KromeKing> zen net.yelling
<CountZer0> does having a voice imply some sort of power?
<andy_> ideas / information / signal is not entirely == net.voice, imho....
<scotto> not inherently.
<jsitz> speaking to another person is the power to impose will...if you choose
+to.....power is what you make it
<aron> well ideas reaching people is power
<scotto> andy: what's missing?
<Ginster> depends what we do with the voice
<tomwhore> Its got to be the whole gestalt of the typing and the typed and
+the readers
<KromeKing> cz: yes....even if the power is personal.
<Ginster> memes/ideas can be power
<scotto> they can be powerful, not power itself
<andy_> scotto - i could be the most idiotic flame-hole on the net and still
+have a net.voice, with no relevant information or ideas getting passed
+along, that's what i'm saying up there...
<scotto> well, what's relevant to the goose is gibberish to the gander, etc.
<KromeKing> well, if anything helps one to know oneself, it is power. I
+believe that interaction with the net does this.
<aron> but at least you are having some sort of effect on people andy even if
+just pissing them off
<CountZer0> How significant do you see your voice as being? Anyone?
<andy_> aron - ok, what if i'm not pissing them off, what if i don't
+participate in any of the communiteks (sorry for self-referencing =) on
+the net...just having an account, that impacts the net...
<andy_> significance is relative, specially on the net...next question...=)
<aron> true, but minimally
<scotto> How do you measure significance?
<KromeKing> me? Not very, cz, but I feel that I get heard as much as
+anyone.
<Ginster> depends on who i am talking to and what we are talking about
<andy_> yeah minimally, but, "i'm still here".....i could crash an obscure
+computer somewhere, that would be a net.voice...
<aron> granted
<jsitz> well cz--talking to anyone is a great way for me to expand and
+expound on my ideas...whatever the effects of my presence...so be it
<Ginster> [interpersonally, a big difference with each other..."globally" =
+who knows!
<CountZer0> Is this to ephemeral a medium to have real impact??
<KromeKing> NO!
<Ginster> not ephemeral at all -
<jsitz> CZ hell YES.......it has so many implications
<scotto> you can be as loud as you want, sure, but importance is defined from
+outside, etc.
<Ginster> because we reach the whole world
<scotto> which medium? the net as medium?
<KromeKing> but cz, what kind of impact are you talking about?
<Ginster> and we make contacts worldwide
<CountZer0> but that reach is fleeting?
<andy_> you can define your own importance tho....i don't think i am as
+important on the net as some people do....cuz on the net i control all that i
+see and hear, almost....
<KromeKing> I mean, shit, I'M impacted!
*** Unknown command: MSAG
*** Signoff: NullSet (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: voidmstr (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: jsitz (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: KromeKing (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: scotto (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: aron (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: StVitus (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: urgen (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
*** Signoff: watch (ircserver.iastate.edu Patriot.mit.edu)
<Ginster> no less so than other mass media
<andy_> fuckkkkkkk
<CountZer0> patriot just went downnnn
<andy_> big split...=)
<Ginster> they will be back
*** watch (irc6514@irc.nsysu.edu.tw) has joined channel #voices
*** urgen (poolem@kira.CSOS.ORST.EDU) has joined channel #voices
*** aron (fisel@hebron.connected.com) has joined channel #voices
*** scotto (scotto@penguin.gatech.edu) has joined channel #voices
*** KromeKing (raunn@NEURON.TAMU.EDU) has joined channel #voices
*** jsitz (jsitz@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu) has joined channel #voices
*** voidmstr (mindvox@mindvox.phantom.com) has joined channel
#voices
*** NullSet (ers0925@TAMSUN.TAMU.EDU) has joined channel #voices
*** karp (karp@age.cs.columbia.edu) has joined channel #voices
<jsitz> but it also has a solid, earth based driving force... I mean to be
+really way out...I was discussing the VR exploration of planets and the
+network system in space exploration...ie an expedition to Mars
<scotto> my "impact" will not be defined by my own sense of importance
<scotto> but by their sense of my lack of it
<aron> scotto : so it's relative :)
<KromeKing> yes we should
<scotto> yup. :) i luv it.
* andy_ nods....aron knows...=) that's all you have to say to shut people
+up..."it's all relative"
<CountZer0> What constraints do you see on your voice?
<NullSet> I'm constrained by time, mostly.
<aron> the chief constraint has to be the number of other voices,
+eventually as net population increases it becomes more difficult to get
+heard
<scotto> what constraints: what people will read, mostly.
<andy_> null - grep faster, multitask better....
<bookish> why will more folx on the net make it harder to be heard?
<andy_> ;)
<NullSet> if I had time to devote to it, I could produce a well-researched
+info source that would make me a respected "voice"
<NullSet> but, I do other things too
<aron> raw number, usenet is already a worthless read, too much shit
<jsitz> the outreach...i mean only so many people are here and not all the
+time.....it is frustrating to try and be as *here* as you can be in such a
+narrow band of time
<aron> numbers
<aron> so the good stuff is that much harder to find
<jsitz> you can't talk above the din if too many people are in the same
+space
<CountZer0> Is the Net a great equalizer, are all voices equally loud?
<KromeKing> very much so, cz, but not totally.
<scotto> as long as all voices are equally deletable, they are not equally
+loud
<KromeKing> even we have our gods
<jsitz> scotto- is it so bad to want to spread ideas and take in new
+ones?..this is the easiest way for me to do such a thing in a global manner
<aron> no, but i would say you control the "loudness" yourself, make a
+net.name for youself if you want too
<scotto> your voice isn't loud at all if i don't want to read it.
<jsitz> I find irc, irc seems to be a more personal, more *human* way to
+communicate
<CountZer0> scotto: but it still takes up the same bandwidth..
<scotto> more "human"?
<jsitz> your volume is how you project it...and who listens to you
<scotto> bandwidth doesn't equal influence.
<aron> right, but someone will read it, and if enough people like it, or are
+just inundated by mass quantities, you will know about it sooner or later
<Ginster> but some authors I read first
<scotto> see usenet.
<Ginster> and some threads i read first
<CountZer0> but it does equal potential
<tomwhore> It how ya filter that makes up your net.ear
<scotto> potential is meaningless until actualized, though.
<scotto> you can't measure potential influence by sheer volume of posts.
<KromeKing> bah! filter?
<aron> no
<aron> but it happens
<scotto> you look and see which memes survive, that's all.
<andy_> aron - yep.....it really does equal it all out (net, that is), cuz
+there's just so many people, that even if u avoid something it gets back to
+you....
<jsitz> it is face to face ...or voice to voice as the case may be....human to
+me is being able to carry a conversation and get input
<KromeKing> read it all! right andy? =)
<andy_> yep
<andy_> =)
<CountZer0> Ok, what do you see as the potentialities for a voice on the Net?
<scotto> "potentialities"?
<andy_> CZ - whatever they and the people with ears decide on
<CountZer0> what can you accomplish?
<scotto> friendships, art, communities, noise, zines, what else...
<jsitz> cz-- friendship, research, common ground
<Ginster> all I have on the net is a voice, and I talk more here than other
+places..
<CountZer0> Ok all, How different is your net voice than your RL voice?
<NullSet> Not different at all, really.
<Ginster> same voice, cz
<jsitz> CZ- there is no difference for me
<CountZer0> no persona change?
<CountZer0> at all?
<scotto> my RL voice differs strikingly from my net voice.
<CountZer0> not more forward?
<scotto> yes, big persona change.
<tomwhore> No difference in the voice on or off, except when I got a sore
+throat or a hang nail
<CountZer0> yeah here you're "just an 8 point font"
<scotto> in RL, I cannot conveniently
<NullSet> no, no persona change for me
<Ginster> i try to write just as i am
<jsitz> nope, why should I be something I'm not....I have no reason to be
+anything else...I am who I am
<scotto> subscribe or join to the attractors that attract me.
<andy_> you can't compare rl voice to net.voice because of the difference
+in, like, sensory input, different environments.....
<CountZer0> then why the /nicks?
<voidmstr> big change here--i have a verrry straight day job
<scotto> what nick?
<scotto> heh.
<Ginster> because my real name was taken.
<NullSet> I'd be "erich", but there's already an "erich"
<aron> what nick? :)
<Ginster> ok....
*** andy_ is now known as andy
*** Ginster is now known as richrd
<tomwhore> Yea but rl its all two way differences, on the net its just a font
+thing
<andy> i feel so....free, now....=)
<scotto> ah, making a point, are you?
<richrd> it took a while but i figured that out
<scotto> my net.persona, my net.voice if you will, was carefully crafted to
+help me get around in this particular memetic stew.
<scotto> i've found that my net.voice doesn't function well in RL.
<richrd> i try to be as real as possible, to do real things
<CountZer0> Does your net life effect your RL and vice versa, how?
<NullSet> It takes up a lot of time!
<NullSet> It keeps me sane.
<NullSet> I am very isolated where I am.
<richrd> my net life connects to my real life
<Scotto> the memes i dig up here strongly affect the way i pursue my rl.
<tomwhore> Net life real life =life
<NullSet> The net allows me to keep in touch with people far away who were
+once in my RL.
<NullSet> Recently IRC has allowed me to discover folx who share common
+interests.
<NullSet> This is hard in my RL situation.
<andy> so does the phone, so does a car, so does a piece of paper and a stamp
<andy> so does a tv
<aron> i would say, irc is bad for spreading useful info in a efficient
+manner, but it isn't designed for that
<andy> when ISDN gets here with realtime audio/video, i think the net
+will be more valid as an *integrated* aspect of rl
<Scotto> oh come on,
<Scotto> we're not talking about "replacement"
<Scotto> i mean, will IRC or elists exist if everything goes
+realtime/audiovideo?
<richrd> 10 people cannot share a phone call - but it works here
<voidmstr> net.anonymity is also free-making---liberating
<richrd> 10-way conference calls get noisy
<NullSet> voice has a certain immediacy - it has to be attended to
<Scotto> but everyone's so hip on expanding and advancing, and all the
+theories cover how IRC or how email *simulates* *real* life, but what if
+we didn't come here for "real" life, what if we're interested in something
+with much less similarity and much more weirdness
<richrd> we each get our own line of text here, maybe that is the difference
<CountZer0> So do you all see your voice on the net as just an exact extension
+of your voice off the net?
<Scotto> no, not at all.
<NullSet> I do, I guess.
<tomwhore> Yea why do we always NEED to get the net to be more RL?????
<aron> i just see the net as a useful and entertaining tool, nothing more
<aron> I can do stuff with it
<voidmstr> i found a new voice on the net---one that i didn't know was there
<tomwhore> The net is another input for my mind
<richrd> the net reaches more/different people
<andy> so the net's an extension
<aron> richard: exactly
<andy> anyone think the net is revolkutionary?
<CountZer0> or can be?
<aron> yeah with a k
<richrd> yes - i used to publish in print, but now i work on the net
<tomwhore> The net is evolutionary
<Scotto> a revolution is revolutionary; a medium only facilitates what it
+needs to.
<voidmstr> i do net.art i never print any of it---my new medium is
+electrons
<richrd> newspapers were fun, i thought newswires would be even more
+fun
<andy> it's an extension, an advancement, new technologies, that's
+evolutionary, right?
<aron> right
<tomwhore> New ways of conversing and new ways to listen and learn
<aron> unless it is sudden
<richrd> like when the telephone was first introduced
<aron> and it hasn't been
<tomwhore> caves->print->books>computers->net
<tomwhore> sort of like that
<richrd> or tv - but we have control of this medium
<aron> but soon it could be, potential energy is dripping all over our hands
<andy> put telephone in there cuz that oral diversion is significant, and the
+fact that the net is literal, not oral
<richrd> screen art is like cave art
<tomwhore> Yea the path is a multi thread that weaves into the net which in
+turn will weave out into the next stuff
<CountZer0> do you all see your voice on here as more, less or the same
+powerful as in non net life?
<richrd> more
<aron> entirely different
<NullSet> more
<CountZer0> and why?
<aron> apples and oranges
<Scotto> i seem to have more influence here, but my perception is skewed.
<NullSet> I can reach more people.
<tomwhore> If I could reach as many like minded people off the net It would
+be the same
<richrd> why read about other places when you can talk to them directly?
<alysoun> there are no pretenses here, no worry about what people think of
+you...you think it and it shows up on the screen
<richrd> different audience here than in rl
<Scotto> ain't that the truth.
<aron> CZ: well in the context of the net compared to rl I would say more,
+but in just rl. the majority of the world could give a fuck about the net,
+so I would only say more "power" in relation to the net itself
<richrd> the majority of the world cannot get to the net
<richrd> we all must pass a few hurdles to get here
<aron> exactly, or are too stupid/lazy or just plain uninterested
<andy> i don't see any real differences in "power", i think the net just shows
+u outlets and shit u might not've seen before, but u have the same
+potential in either rl or nl
<NullSet> on the net, potentially far more people hear my thoughts than in
+RL
<aron> mine too
<bookish> richrd: how's access relate to power?
<voidmstr> if you look as net.life as just part of rl, its easier to see how
+they must influence each other
<aron> exactly
<andy> null - u could always do something like, send a letter to the editors
+of TIME or somethin,...
<richrd> bookish: the power is potential
<richrd> the access is real
<aron> nl fits into the rl sphere they are not two poles
<NullSet> Yeah, but when I post to USENET, I'm pretty sure it'll get
+published.
<NullSet> "published" in the sense that it'll get to the point that everyone
+can read it
<CountZer0> but time decides what goes in. Usenet includes everything for
+instance
<aron> andy, only if they have email :)
<NullSet> yes, exactly c0
<andy> that's true...the net is more accessible...masses media....rather than
+mass media...that's my big thing...
<richrd> only a small percentage of people have computers, fewer still have
+net access, fewer still irc...
<aron> and although most of usenet is shit, there is good stuff you will find
+there that would never be published in Time
<NullSet> so in that sense my "voice" is magnified
<andy> 2000 people irc at any given time, on a good day
<CountZer0> so let's wrap this up then with some final thought, summarize
<CountZer0> What does it mean to be a voice from the net to you all?
<andy> realtime!
<richrd> i get to talk to people worldwide more than to people in my own
+town
<Scotto> It means having big thick vocal cords.
<NullSet> As a voice "from the net" my thoughts have a certain legitimacy
+that "texts" have that mere speech doesn't.
<NullSet> I mean, the things I say are "in print" in some sense.
<aron> yeah
<alysoun> i can really be myself
<aron> The net while far reaching is shallow however, I feel the net
+currently doesn't have much power outside itself, but as a tool it is very
+useful
<Scotto> Having a "voice from the net" means never having to say, "Hey,
+shut up, I'm trying to talk!"
<andy> see, that's gonna be a big thing.....most people see literal, like,
+culture as an evolution from oral....i only see it as, like, an
+abstraction....that's why people like the print thing so much i think.../me
+wants to talk about oral/literal and the net...=
<NullSet> when I speak, my speech disappears
<NullSet> but as text, my speech has persistence
<NullSet> my thoughts become "part of the record"
<richrd> this is the "new literature"
<andy> see i think there's this attraction of the net because of what erich
+said, about "publishing" and stuph...society clings to literal culture.....
#####
SCOTTO: is a voice in many different communities around the Net. He can
be "heard" offering his special brand of self-styled net.philosophy (with
a dash of cynicism, a pinch of sarcasm, and more often than not, a thought
provoking and eye-opening point of view) on several e-mail lists (Aleph &
Leri) as well as on IRC and other places where a platform is offered, and an
ear is open. Following is an essay we received from Scotto by way of
e-mail...
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1993 20:37:53 -0500 (EDT)
From: Scotto <scotto@*******.******.***>
To: voices-request@andy.bgsu.edu
Subject: Format Chauvinism
FORMAT CHAUVINISM, AND WHY MY EDGE IS SHARPER THAN YOURS
Hi. My name is Scotto, and I'm a Voice From The Net.
There. Got that out of the way. Now let's get down to business.
First of all, the Net is just full of Jerks. I mean, I think we all know that
by now. It's just a sad and unfortunate fact that most of the people willing
and able to get Net access are also incredible Jerks. Fact is, they're
everywhere. At one point, we thought they'd just stay over on alt.jerk where
they belonged, but that wasn't good enough, and the next thing we knew, they
had the jerk.* hierarchy up and running, Jerk-L was booming, and #Jerk was
crashing lesser servers the world over.
I suppose this was inevitable. I mean, I think we all know that, in fact, most
of the people on the *planet* are Jerks. And we can't just sweep these Jerks
under the rug, you know, that whole "civil rights" thing cuts both ways, etc.
No, all we can really do is make sure these Jerks stay in their own jerkspace
and out of our coolspace. And the easiest way to do that is to make sure that
our coolspace is situated right smack dab on the Edge.
This is my latest fun thing to do: starting up a casual conversation with an
innocent Normal somewhere (as we all know, 78% of the Normals are also Jerks --
they're everywhere!), talk about, I dunno, the weather, cable TV, the latest
"Peanuts," and then, BLAM, start into a rant about how human communication
itself is in a sudden, unstoppable period of whirling, churning mutation via
the global Internet, which will someday take over the planet by way of full
virtual immersion and a stray modem or two. The Normal's eyes always grow
wide, and then I casually mention how I was recently logged into the Net for 47
days straight, chewing up email like bacon bits, rampaging all over Usenet
reprinting old Yes lyrics, occupying 98 separate IRC channels and regaling them
all with my dreams of joining a traveling ballet company, and oh yes, keeping
up with my stories on the telly (gotta love "All My Children," dontcha?). I
say, "Yeah, I guess you could say I was surfing the Edge, zooming on pure
information, swimming in an unholy concrescence of datastreams, a virtual wave
pool of seemingly unrelated trivia that come together to form a veritable
tsunami of Meaning," and meanwhile, the Normal has noticed that my eyeballs are
bleeding and is quietly tip-toeing away to call the authorities. I get kicked
out of more donut shops this way.
The problem these days, though, is that now you can find Jerks practically
selling *tickets* to the Edge, I mean, they've got roadmaps and everything, and
parking is cheap. Well, obviously, if there are Jerks on the Edge, it's time
to relocate the Edge to better digs. The Edge hangs out in different spots in
different contexts, mind you. And in the context of the Net, the Edge has
everything to do with words and which ones you choose and what order you put
them in, blah blah blah -- all the stuff you picked up in Net.Sociology 101.
We know Usenet is out; I mean, they may as well just call it Jerknet. For a
time there, forming a Community via email -- the Mailing List Phenomenon of the
pre-Jerk.Invasion period -- was one way of almost approaching the Edge.
However, a plethora of unsightly bugs developed, among them the annoying
tendency to assume an audience that was all like You, the crass desire of
Newbies (42% Jerks, even way back then) to trot out old Warhorse Topics ("uh,
hi, my name is Ghirque, could anyone tell me what the hell 'memetics' is?"),
followed by the inevitable Disinterested Blowoff by the Regulars ("listen, pal,
I was grafting memes before you were knee high to a singularity"), and
eventually, the horrifying period of Lurker Cleansing that took the hipper
lists by storm (no accurate stats on Lurkers are available, although a survey
of Regulars estimated the Lurker population to be 92.6% Jerks).
Yes, friends, we almost lost the Edge during the great Jerk.Invasion, but
thankfully, the Regulars figured it out for us, and moseyed on over to IRC. It
was an inevitable progression, mind you. Whereas a mailing list was capable of
sustained point development and somewhat civilized conversation, IRC turned out
to be gloriously inappropriate for anything Of Import, making it the New
Conquest of all your favorite Edge-Surfers (swimwear by IBM!). And they
actually succeeded in instilling Relevance in a previously Relevance-Free
environment; don't let my own person cynicism fool you -- the Edge acquire a
brand new medium on that day. Oh, sure, the Jerks tried to follow, but,
really, if you ever saw the vapid and empty conversation on #lurker, you know
that these Clowns were no immediate threat.
From here, it's only a few moments until we eliminate entirely the need to use
verbs, and soon we'll be able to communicate in densely-packed monosyllabic
semiotic wonders, soon we'll be composing strings of sheer letter-number
combinations that will in one line communicate the equivalent of an Anne Rice
novel. Some people say they like IRC because it's more like Real Life, but
hell, if Real Life was all it was cracked up to be, I wouldn't be on the damned
Net to begin with (escapism alert!). Listen, Jerks are everywhere, and the
easiest way to keep a safe distance is to render yourself unintelligible by way
of our friend the Edge ("it submerses you in an overwhelming futuristic
memepool, propelling you headlong on your way to a cultural and symbolic Omega
Point -- and still slices this tomato!"). This is the Way, don't you see? The
Regulars are already onto it; heck, it's *their* memes that *create* the Edge,
remember, while the rest of you wannabes entertain paltry attempts to hold a
job *and* read 212 messages a day from the same ten people. Yeah, it'll be
rough, but what the Net needs now is not peace and love incorporated, but a
separate IRC channel for every single User. It's the future, man, I'm telling
you.
Or.
Forget what I just said. I'm a Jerk myself, as you can probably tell. And,
uh, when my friends went to IRC in droves, I went there too, because they were
my Friends. And when some of my friends tried to keep a struggling email
community alive, I went there too, because Places Like That mean something to
somebody eventually down the line. Oh, sure, I also wallowed in Healthy
Cynicism and ragged the Regulars because of my own little media chauvinism, but
heck, I'm only Human. And some days I think I'll never forgive William Gibson
for creating the most vicious, devastating picture of the future and planting
that meme *firmly* in the minds of Young CyberAmerica without so much as a
single caveat, and if there's one productive thing I can use my cynical
Net.Voice for, it's encouraging Communities where other Voices can speak
without fear of jaded reprimand. The Voices From The Net that I am most
Attracted to are the Guides and the Signposts, and the ones that, umm, Pull Us
Together with an intellectual prowess and/or an emotional depth and warmth and
passion, in order for us to mold our future all the easier. *Yes*, I am laying
on the cheese, this rant is practically sliced and pasteurized, but what they
hey -- you can't Lurk forever, huh?
Your pal,
Scotto
* * *
__A FEW MINUTES WITH... ANDY HAWKS__
If you're asking yourself, Andy Who? Or maybe, What's this voice doing
ringing in my ears? Well, here's a quick autobiography of Andy Hawks.
Hopefully this will answer both of your questions:
i have been using computers since i was 7, been telecomputing
since i was 11 or 12. alas, i only found the internet two or
three years ago after a long time of exploration and probing
throughout various types of virtual communities and
information systems. upon finding the internet i created a
file called "The Futureculture FAQ/Cyberography" to help me
keep track of resources talked about on various Usenet groups.
that file became a valued resource to other people (.ed note-
most recently the FAQ has been mentioned in the Utne Reader
magazine, and on the multimedia disk being distributed with
Billy Idol's new album "Cyberpunk") and spawned an email-based
list (e-list) to discuss aspects of cyberspace, technoculture,
the new edge, cyberpunk and cyberculture, etc. i no longer run
the list directly but still belong to the community that the list
spawned...things continue to propagate. i continue to search,
explore, and probe the net and real life for interesting
information and items relative to tomorrow's possible realities,
and try to make them real today.
And now.... a few minutes with Andy Hawks...
vox et praeterea nihil
----------------------
We can live together love together
Do whatever we want together
Best of all Possible Worlds
Nothing is impossible.
-The Shamen
possible worlds
I remember gazing at the image on the t.v., letting my mind sprint
through seemingly magical imaginations, trying to think of the
realistic prospects of such a phenomena. The picture was of a human
figure existing in a dimension somewhere between synergistic ecstasies
and a serene unity. Energies flowing within, without, around, and
through the figure, forward and backward across the space and time
enveloping the image. It seemed to represent a constant harmony of
the inner reaches of the mind, heart, and soul. I commenced the
picture to motion in my mind, flashes of the figure in realtime
traveling through dimensions alongside these universal energies, a
hyperreal wonderland beyond infinite spectrums of ethereal, electronic
sound and light.
Somehow I felt that in the gestalt pyramid of the human collective,
this visionary portrait already existed to some degree: a place where
energy propels beyond time and space, instantaneously from another
person's mind, or a group of minds, and into my own head
simultaneously with the ease of a dolphin playing among clear calm
Pacific waters. Effortless communication in waves reaching heights
unbeknownst to the common human experience.
We endlessly strive towards something resembling a post-human
condition like the one I offered above under the shield of technology,
the wand of mystery, and the helmet of knowledge, battling towards an
abstracted ideal, an invisible dragon, The Perfect State. Jeesh.
We're never going to get there. Never. Yet it is an innate aspect
of our existence that we *move forward*. Bigger, better, faster,
stronger. Just do it. Seek out new life and new civilization. Be
fast and dense. Sigh. Moving forward is so relative. More aptly I
think it appropriate to say it is human nature to *move*. So, in this
McLuhan-would-be-proud age of CNN and fiber-optic telephone lines,
where any pertinent movement in the world is only a "where'd I
put that damn remote" hunt away, how does one move ahead of the
Jones'?
netopia in blue
Ah, the Internet. I'm not going to describe it in oversimplified
"well, it's kinda like this, it might be compared to this,
it's made up of this, but it's not that" terms appropriate
for cheesy mall-computer-store books. If you don't know what the
Internet is, ask someone. Lessee, there's at least 10 million
people on the damn thing, growing exponentially, and assuming everyone
followed the right path down the yellow brick road, you *should* get
10 million different responses.
That's the beauty of the Internet. Each to one's own. The
environment is as subjective or objective as you make it, you are as
close to it as you want to be, the virtual-circles you found yourself
in are by your own choosing. It's the closest thing on this earth,
imho, to that post-humanistic state at the beginning, where a person
coexists in harmony with all these energies, oceans of effortless
communication, dolphins in the information Caribbean.
If you think you're moving forward, towards The Perfect State, if
you're an individual who has reached "the Goal", odds are it
either had something to do with a completely natural state of being,
or the high point of technology. The high point of technology right
now that's available to the masses would probably have to be the
Internet, so that's probably where you found your white-light -
enlightenment. Scary thought.
i'm not an ai
I am one of those who climbed up the gestalt pyramid towards "the
Goal" with the rope named Internet. In fact, I have gone many
places with that trusty rope [insert Indiana_Jones multimedia
soundbyte here, overlaid with background images of Tron]. I don't
believe in final frontiers. There is always going to be new territory
to explore, whether it be undersea, in space, in human understanding,
or in virtuality. I guess I might be considered a Settler as far as
the Internet is concerned, if forced to reference back to real life
and historic events. Living in the matrix, in cyberspace, is just
like any facet of real life. I can't over-emphasize that enough.
The only difference being the (for now, for a decade or so) lack of
extended sensory input, and the fact that physical geography has no
relevance. (Or rather, it is only relevant if you make it relevant).
Other than that, (which are two major points mind you, the hallmarks
of cyberspace as we know it), virtuality and "normal" reality
are the same thing. Don't think they're not. Even self-proclaimed and
labeled net.gurus and net.gods talk about the addictions of the net. I
used to think that, too. Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb thing to think. If the
net is an addiction, then so is reality, day to day living. It's the same
thing.
My parents were among the first generation to grow up with TV. I am
among the first generation to grow up *in* cyberspace. I owned an
Atari before they renamed them the Atari 2600, I owned my first Apple
(praise Woz) at 7, I have been modeming since I was 11. I began
running a BBS at 13. I am 19 now, I have been on the Internet for 2
years. In those 2 years, I ran the FutureCulture E-list, created the
FutureCulture FAQ, helped do the alt.cyberpunk FAQ, contributed to a
variety of other e-lists and Usenet groups, spent an incredible amount
of time on IRC, gained, a bit of attention and notoriety through
various territories on the net. I am just your average net-maven,
netfiend, net.addict, whatever you want to call me, that's fine. I
can't really relate to Generation X with the Brady Bunch, but, umm,
maybe there's a FAQ for it I can gopher and then grep through. I
think that I have some time free for a dentist appointment, but let me
double-click on my appointments program on my palmtop and to make
sure. I am more at home in front of a keyboard then a TV. More at
home in front of a keyboard than a chalkboard. I "type" smilies
through an obscure hand-motion, in real life. Friends greet people by
saying "re". A MUD is sweeter than a Hershey's bar. Sometimes when I
speak, I see myself typing the words out. I prefer an email address to a
phone number. I've had Gibsonian dreams of being a ROM construct. Tron
and WarGames reign supreme to my fellow Indiana Netopians.
Goddamnit I live here, in cyberspace. On my voice-mail message right
now, I have this sample from Wild Palms that featured William
Gibson's quirky cameo which talks about cyberspace, and then I come
on and say "Hi this is Andy. I'm not here right now, I'm 'probably
hanging out in cyberspace. You can reach me there or leave a message and
I'll get back to you as soon as I check my messages." I calculated one
time I have spent months of my life on the Internet. People for whom the
net is foreign are analogous to an ancient foreign language of which I am
completely unfamiliar and have no real desire to go back and learn.
That's the past, I'm here now. This is the place I have chosen. I remain
on the net, living, loving, feeling, growing, learning, experiencing,
exploring, flaming, lusting even. The net is not a magical place to live,
no more magical than I allow myself to be mystified, and it's not an
exotic place to me, no more exotic than the places I have yet to discover,
but will eventually. The net is only confusing or challenging when my
lack of effort or devotion fails. The net is only substandard or inane
when I allow my ego to hang out beyond its usual belt-loop. I know all
there is to know about the net only when I am lazy. I lose faith in
the net when I lose faith in my self. I worship the net only when I
am unsure of my own space in time. I care enough about the net to
seek vengeance upon people who pluck one of its pedals and ruin
the glory of the flower. I travel its subways, its highways, its
sprawl, and its farms. Uncharted territories and virtual urban ghettos.
Oceans of information and desserts of noise.
The Internet changes lives, shapes futures, helps shape society at
large. It is a mirror of humans and society, it is also an empty
canvas waiting to be painted upon by Picassos and preschoolers. I
simply just can't lasso the net into a perspective that does it
justice.
the revolution will not be revolutionary
There is nothing historically revolutionary about the Internet,
though, because every technological advancement, no matter its
degree of importance, is always at least somewhat revolutionary. In
other words, each new technology supersedes the one that came before
it in a specific area, that's why it's an advancement. The old one
becomes outdated, the new one becomes accepted, and the next step forward
is undertaken. That's not revolution, that's progression. Say you are in
the basement of Macy's department store (or the metaphorical human
pyramid), and have this incredible unceasing desire to reach the top. So,
you climb the stairs (escalators and elevators are a free ride for the
lazy =). Are you going to stop after each stair and say "wow, I just
climbed the 4,038th stair!". No, you don't stop, you move forward, keep
going. The Internet seems to be the magical 4038th stair for a lot of
people. And that's fine I guess, but, just don't forget the stairs above
and below you. And don't forget that Macy's, as far as my allegory is
concerned, is in an intense period of growth and prosperity, and has no
desire to stop expanding while you continue to climb.
Yet I also have to say, continuing with the analogy, Macy's is the
best place I have yet to find to shop. Especially the Internet floor.
I think I'll live there, at least until the ISDN floor, which is
now under construction, gets completed.
more real than realtime
ISDN, brings me to the next point. I am just sort of rambling here,
spewing/ranting about whatever I feel, which is pretty much my style
(facilitated in part by extended net.usage =), but I would like to
mention the next step up. ISDN. Integrated Services Digital Network.
If we who are on the Internet now, who have been, who came after the
pioneers and explorers of the 60's, are the settlers, ISDN will
mark the rise of cities in the c-space frontier. A lot of the Lewis
and Clarks out there on the net are filled with one of two things:
fear that ISDN and this slow process of commercialization will forever
corrupt the net, or, second, this idiotic reactionary bravado attitude
that the net can survive any obstacle in it's path because of
it's history and the people who use it and all that bull.
I think it's safe to say that ten years from now, you won't
recognize the net. The net *literally* changes by the nanosecond.
Time moves five to ten times faster on the net, depending on which
net.cyclones you find yourself spinning around in. ISDN has the
potential to rock your world, take it right into the Jetson (as in
George, boy Elroy, etc.) Age. However, there's a screenfull of
variables that can affect how ISDN reveals itself - political,
economic, technological concerns, power games, and under the table
wheelin'-and-dealin'. Those that stay current on ISDN-related
topics are probably watching the interactions between the telco/media
giants (AT&T, Times/Warner, US West, TCI) and the computer companies
(Apple, Sun Microsystems, et. al, even MIT's technogeek-trendy
Media Labs seem to be a significant voice, not to mention
organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, etc., who also
want their "vox populi" heard and respected). If the computer
companies have a lot of input, the Internet may live long and prosper,
but if the telco/media giants come out on top without hearing the
computer companies, the net may live long and flounder.
Expect a lot of changes in the net, then, some of which are already
coming true: multimedia all over the place (sight/sound - email
messages may be Quicktime / MPEG movies, for example), an increase in
realtime-oriented app's and features out the butt (faster, and
denser with more sensory input), and other neat toys to dream about.
I can't wait for ISDN to get here. However, I think we need to
start *NOW* talking about the socioeconomic and political aspects of
full-out ISDN, the impending cultural shifts, not to mention
"secondary" topics, such as changes in our perspectives on the
humanities. Issues that arenUt really being addressed, but need to
be, before ISDN gets massive.
pulse
Until then, however, we've got this Internet thing lying around.
My relationship with the net is as close, if not closer, than any
person I've known or loved. I generally spend two hours a day
around any given person in real life, I generally spend four to five
hours each day on the net. I jonez for the net when I find myself
away for an extended period of time (two/three days). There is no
methadone for the net, because as I said before, because there is no
true methadone for the substance real life. The energies on the net
plant their juices in your mind eventually, and it's a permanent
symbiotic relationship, forever evolving this crystalline, fractal
circuit board of information. Nowhere else but the Internet can you
explore the inner-forces that reside in the maelstrom of hardcore
information overload -- when your email reaches 1000 messages per day,
multitasking with two or three email sessions, a couple telnets going,
an IRC session, MediaMOO or some other MUD, ftping, doing some shell
programming and reading Usenet when you allow yourself the time. And
you have complete control over the environment. Engaging in
post-psychedelic ("cyberdelic" for lack of a less-trendy word)
netrips -- if LSD is mind candy, a netrip is a can of Mt. Dew and a
couple piracetams. Feel it, feel these wires.
Every generation has a primitive urge to gather together in praise of
it's specific perspective on modern time. The hippies and
Woodstock, Gen. X has an occasional Ravestock-esque event, but the
beauty of virtual culture is that the tribes are constantly gathered.
Permanent, lasting substance. Forever sending signals through
thunderous clouds of noise. Exponentially the net grows, morphs, and
we as individual cells in the womb congregate for specific and
undetermined purposes, consciously and subconsciously, traveling
underneath the flesh of cybernetics. Silicon, chrome organs linking
together the human experience in pounding rhythms. In silence, you
can hear these rhythms as keyclicks on some keyboard far away in
Osaka, Tel Aviv, or San Francisco. The hands of the keyclicks remain
forever across tomorrow, but the minds are constantly linked in
synchronicity on the Internet. The voices are silent, the minds
breathe.
* * *
__A SHOuT IN THE DARK__
"Each of us is a small voice sounding among millions,
so it's possible to feel quite unimportant, but then again
each of us *is* unimportant in the larger scheme of things,
so I look at this aspect of the net as a reality check"
--T. Maddox
The reality check is here!
Looking out across the enormous terrain of the Net it is not difficult,
nor does it take long to realize the insignificance of one single voice
amongst the great crowd. One voice, your own, reaching out to the deep
entangled void of the matrix. Getting lost is assumed, taken for granted,
expected.
What can be lost by one, may be found by another.
(net.confucianism, the Tao of Net?)
One voice alone gets lost, swept up in the vast ocean comprised of
millions of similar "sounds." Each, on its own, a slight whisper, a barely
audible noise to the ear of humanity.
But look into the ocean. Look deeply. It is easy to get caught in the
riptide without remembering that the waves were once only ripples, the
ripples nothing more than a glassy surface, a standing pool.
One small pebble breaks the plain, and a small wave appears, echoing out
from the center and dying before it can reach the edge. A thousand pebbles
and the pool is a spastic series of rolling waves, emanating out to reach
towards the edges, filling in the calm and faraway reaches of the pool with
swaying rushes. Splitting into separate forms and patterns as the waves
impact and intermingle with one another. A million pebbles and the wave is
no longer just that, it is its own entity, its own tide, its own current,
it has its own name. It is called, the Net.
What is the Net?
Is the Net a place or a thing?
Where IS the Net? [why, you're soaking in it... ;-)]
How do I get there?
These are basic questions and distinctions. In the 5,000 some odd year
history of the human race, the question of the substance and existence of
"reality" has been often considered, but , to a great degree,
unsatisfactorily answered. And before we could find an answer to this
basic question, we have added another facet to its ever burgeoning weight.
Virtual Reality.
Virtual implies a state of "not being in actual fact."
But the words are here. I can see them. You can see them. You are reading
them even now.
Is this virtual?
Importance. What is important. Can something that is "not being in actual
fact" be important?
What is the importance of the "pebble" to the "ocean"?
Alone, it is barely noticeable. But combined with all the others, it is a
force to be reckoned with. It is this force that we are trying to gauge,
to analyze, to understand.
Of course, this understanding may never come. As I said, we have never
answered the questions of reality in general. How do we expect to now face
this tremendous task? The answer, we must realize, may never come. The
world is a subjective place in which all answers seem relative depending
on one's situation:
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."
"The pen is mightier than the sword."
Which is the answer? Both? Neither?
The best we can do is to offer some semblance of explanation for the world
around us. And that is what we attempt to accomplish by adding this bit to
the stream. This is another "pebble" to strike the surface of the "ocean".
Another element added to the tide, creating a current that we hope will
someday carry us to a state of greater understanding.
Voices are like fingerprints, everyone has their own. There are many
different voices on the Net, as there are in our face-to-face everyday
world. But these voices are defined, in many cases, more by where they
come from than by who they come from.
IRC, MUD's, USENET, E-MAIL, BBS's...
All are different ways to be "heard" on the Net.
TONE, SEMANTICS, GESTURE...
All these exist on the Net. The forms change:
capital letters = shouts
CAN YOU HEAR US?
emote messages = actions
CountZer0 sits down and writes something akin to philosophical babble. ;-)
- the meanings remain.
They have impact and importance. They can be soothing or maddening, quiet
or deafening.
But it IS time to notice the words, and not just the mode.
Together these voices create what we call the Net. The whole of which is
greater than the sum of its parts. Without them, it is nothing. And for
all of these "pebbles" cast in, it remains a largely dark, still
and empty place. Our aim is to make the waves from these pebbles reach
out further, to land on the shores of previously uncharted areas, to fill
the space with the ripples of enlightenment.
We'll attempt to sidestep the perils of pretension (and the alarming
actuality of alliteration). It is easy to indulge and to wax rhapsodic
about such subjects [As you see I am doing now to a great degree]. Our
words and ideas may be grandiose, our goals set precariously high. The
ends to our means may be unattainable or possibly even non-existant. But
that fact has never stopped anyone from reaching towards the holy grail
that is knowledge, and the truths and missteps of our attempts will be born
out here as we add our input to this new wave.
In future issues the matters at hand will be more deeply discussed. But
here in our first issue, I think it is important to relay to you from
where it is exactly we are coming. We hope that this has been
accomplished and that you will decide to join us on our journey.
And in the expanse that is the Net we hope to be an amplifier which allows
this wave to wash over, soaking us in its kinetic splendor.
* * *
__COMING ATTRACTIONS__
Once again we thank you for joining us in our project. We do hope that it
has been enjoyable and informative for you. If so, tell your friends and
neighbors about us (we crave publicity and dabble in self-promotion). If
not, don't tell anyone!
Well, we're all excited about issue #2 of Voices From The Net. We're
already hard at work putting it together so that we can keep your regular
supply of voices coming, as we said earlier, on a more or less monthly
basis. That's right, September 1 is the target date for #2 and here's a
little preview of what we're planning for it:
Volume 1 Issue #2 Voices From The Net
On the "shelves" -- September 1, 1993
Being a new voice from the net.
Interviews, essays, and random, multi-flavored spewing from:
Adam Curry (Mtv)
Billy Idol (that Cyberpunk? guy)
Margie Ingall (Sassy magazine)
Various and sundry other voices from newbies around the Net.
See ya'll next month.
Take care, and tell 'em Voices *sent* you!
---------------------------------------------
To Subscribe to "Voices from the Net"
or to send us your comments/contributions:
send email to:
Voices-request@andy.bgsu.edu
[if you want to subscribe]
subject: Voices from the Net
body: subscribe
[Aint nothin' to it!]
=================================
"Voices from the Net" also has official Internet Archive sites at:
ftp> ftp.dana.edu
uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu
netsys1.netsys.com
=================================
We can also frequently be found bouncing around the net in various places,
catch us if you can!
Look for--
Bookish swilbur@andy.bgsu.edu
CountZer0 mgardbe@andy.bgsu.edu
NEURO fbohann@andy.bgsu.edu
see ya' dare....
=================================
There is also a Macintosh Hypercard stack version of Issue 1.1 available.
look for:
VoicesFromTheNet1.1.sit.hqx
=================================
Voices from the Net: Acceptable Use Statement:
In a perfect world, we could just post this, send it out through the wires
and forget about it. In a perfect world... In this world, we have things
like copyright laws, legal permissions, the need to "own" one's words.
This document is free, but it is not public domain. The individual authors
retain the rights to their work. You may reproduce and distribute it. In
fact, we encourage it. Spreading free information is part of what "Voices
from the Net" is all about. Just keep it FREE. We hope that the zine will
be useful as well as entertaining. If it seems useful to you, then use it.
But be collegial. Cite your sources(*), and don't take liberties with the
text. Respect the voices contained here. [* Thanks to Bruce Sterling for
inspiration, and for support.]
Voices from the Net 1.1, copyright 1993.
Comments
Post a Comment