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... 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"? 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. More generally, what parts of the net do you frequent. Why >those, and why not others? "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. 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"? 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. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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? 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. 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? 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. _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? 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. 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? 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. Finally, are you working on anything currently that you >want to crow about? 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 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 ok let me set my logfile you all know why we're here right? yup well, sort of almost we're gonna ask you some questions and we want you all just to +spew i assume you have slipcovers. ha. ok hehe the rooms just a rental so we don't care s p e w . . . =) ok #1 Is Irc where you hang out most of the time? If not, where? * KromeKing rubs his hands together in anticipation. I hang out on mailing lists most of the time. CountZer0 - in Whole Life or net.life? on the net.. yeah, when I'm not deep within my mailbox I'm here. Ah -- in real life, I tend to hang out in theme parks. irc = always running while I do mail irc, hell yeah..... well, in real life I am found poolside...but my best time of the day +is on irc & the net runs in the background while I write irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc irc =) Why here, folx? 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. bookish - REALTIME "if it's not REALTIME it's CRAP!" =) bookish: realtyme is just so appealing. faster feedback relatively more synchronicity realtime human contact talk is realtime, irc has membrane, thin membrane though, like sex +with a condom just because it's REALTIME doesn't mean it is wonderfully +CONTENT-ful. true expression flows smoother than in mail...points are clearer scotto: why lists then? scotto - yeah, but noone said anything about content yet...=) more content in mail, but more FEELING in irchaos, imho lists include the entire community, pretty much all the time, +provided you want to read. irc automatically means some people will always miss some other +people. scotto, I have seen long posts all over the net without one iota of +content i agree; i can delete those a lot easier than I can here hard to avoid some ninny (heh) in irc who remains content free What does it mean to have a "voice from the net" and do you think +you have one? you said from the net, from the net to where?? i have a voice _on_ the net when I am on the net, but no echoes +off the net.. Do you think you have a voice on the net? how would you hear me if i didn't? what does it mean to have this voice? yeah, no matter how small my voice is...it plays a part in the whole yeah it means, on some level, a willingness to impose your POV on the +flux its strange that my net.voice turned out to be not words but +pictures or play with the flux or make the flux 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 be the flux The Flux: just do it. zen net.yelling does having a voice imply some sort of power? ideas / information / signal is not entirely == net.voice, imho.... not inherently. speaking to another person is the power to impose will...if you choose +to.....power is what you make it well ideas reaching people is power andy: what's missing? depends what we do with the voice Its got to be the whole gestalt of the typing and the typed and +the readers cz: yes....even if the power is personal. memes/ideas can be power they can be powerful, not power itself 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... well, what's relevant to the goose is gibberish to the gander, etc. well, if anything helps one to know oneself, it is power. I +believe that interaction with the net does this. but at least you are having some sort of effect on people andy even if +just pissing them off How significant do you see your voice as being? Anyone? 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... significance is relative, specially on the net...next question...=) true, but minimally How do you measure significance? me? Not very, cz, but I feel that I get heard as much as +anyone. depends on who i am talking to and what we are talking about yeah minimally, but, "i'm still here".....i could crash an obscure +computer somewhere, that would be a net.voice... granted 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 [interpersonally, a big difference with each other..."globally" = +who knows! Is this to ephemeral a medium to have real impact?? NO! not ephemeral at all - CZ hell YES.......it has so many implications you can be as loud as you want, sure, but importance is defined from +outside, etc. because we reach the whole world which medium? the net as medium? but cz, what kind of impact are you talking about? and we make contacts worldwide but that reach is fleeting? 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.... 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) no less so than other mass media fuckkkkkkk patriot just went downnnn big split...=) 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 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 my "impact" will not be defined by my own sense of importance but by their sense of my lack of it scotto : so it's relative :) yes we should yup. :) i luv it. * andy_ nods....aron knows...=) that's all you have to say to shut people +up..."it's all relative" What constraints do you see on your voice? I'm constrained by time, mostly. the chief constraint has to be the number of other voices, +eventually as net population increases it becomes more difficult to get +heard what constraints: what people will read, mostly. null - grep faster, multitask better.... why will more folx on the net make it harder to be heard? ;) if I had time to devote to it, I could produce a well-researched +info source that would make me a respected "voice" but, I do other things too raw number, usenet is already a worthless read, too much shit 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 numbers so the good stuff is that much harder to find you can't talk above the din if too many people are in the same +space Is the Net a great equalizer, are all voices equally loud? very much so, cz, but not totally. as long as all voices are equally deletable, they are not equally +loud even we have our gods 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 no, but i would say you control the "loudness" yourself, make a +net.name for youself if you want too your voice isn't loud at all if i don't want to read it. I find irc, irc seems to be a more personal, more *human* way to +communicate scotto: but it still takes up the same bandwidth.. more "human"? your volume is how you project it...and who listens to you bandwidth doesn't equal influence. 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 but some authors I read first see usenet. and some threads i read first but it does equal potential It how ya filter that makes up your net.ear potential is meaningless until actualized, though. you can't measure potential influence by sheer volume of posts. bah! filter? no but it happens you look and see which memes survive, that's all. 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.... 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 read it all! right andy? =) yep =) Ok, what do you see as the potentialities for a voice on the Net? "potentialities"? CZ - whatever they and the people with ears decide on what can you accomplish? friendships, art, communities, noise, zines, what else... cz-- friendship, research, common ground all I have on the net is a voice, and I talk more here than other +places.. Ok all, How different is your net voice than your RL voice? Not different at all, really. same voice, cz CZ- there is no difference for me no persona change? at all? my RL voice differs strikingly from my net voice. not more forward? yes, big persona change. No difference in the voice on or off, except when I got a sore +throat or a hang nail yeah here you're "just an 8 point font" in RL, I cannot conveniently no, no persona change for me i try to write just as i am nope, why should I be something I'm not....I have no reason to be +anything else...I am who I am subscribe or join to the attractors that attract me. you can't compare rl voice to net.voice because of the difference +in, like, sensory input, different environments..... then why the /nicks? big change here--i have a verrry straight day job what nick? heh. because my real name was taken. I'd be "erich", but there's already an "erich" what nick? :) ok.... *** andy_ is now known as andy *** Ginster is now known as richrd Yea but rl its all two way differences, on the net its just a font +thing i feel so....free, now....=) ah, making a point, are you? it took a while but i figured that out my net.persona, my net.voice if you will, was carefully crafted to +help me get around in this particular memetic stew. i've found that my net.voice doesn't function well in RL. i try to be as real as possible, to do real things Does your net life effect your RL and vice versa, how? It takes up a lot of time! It keeps me sane. I am very isolated where I am. my net life connects to my real life the memes i dig up here strongly affect the way i pursue my rl. Net life real life =life The net allows me to keep in touch with people far away who were +once in my RL. Recently IRC has allowed me to discover folx who share common +interests. This is hard in my RL situation. so does the phone, so does a car, so does a piece of paper and a stamp so does a tv i would say, irc is bad for spreading useful info in a efficient +manner, but it isn't designed for that when ISDN gets here with realtime audio/video, i think the net +will be more valid as an *integrated* aspect of rl oh come on, we're not talking about "replacement" i mean, will IRC or elists exist if everything goes +realtime/audiovideo? 10 people cannot share a phone call - but it works here net.anonymity is also free-making---liberating 10-way conference calls get noisy voice has a certain immediacy - it has to be attended to 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 we each get our own line of text here, maybe that is the difference So do you all see your voice on the net as just an exact extension +of your voice off the net? no, not at all. I do, I guess. Yea why do we always NEED to get the net to be more RL????? i just see the net as a useful and entertaining tool, nothing more I can do stuff with it i found a new voice on the net---one that i didn't know was there The net is another input for my mind the net reaches more/different people so the net's an extension richard: exactly anyone think the net is revolkutionary? or can be? yeah with a k yes - i used to publish in print, but now i work on the net The net is evolutionary a revolution is revolutionary; a medium only facilitates what it +needs to. i do net.art i never print any of it---my new medium is +electrons newspapers were fun, i thought newswires would be even more +fun it's an extension, an advancement, new technologies, that's +evolutionary, right? right New ways of conversing and new ways to listen and learn unless it is sudden like when the telephone was first introduced and it hasn't been caves->print->books>computers->net sort of like that or tv - but we have control of this medium but soon it could be, potential energy is dripping all over our hands put telephone in there cuz that oral diversion is significant, and the +fact that the net is literal, not oral screen art is like cave art Yea the path is a multi thread that weaves into the net which in +turn will weave out into the next stuff do you all see your voice on here as more, less or the same +powerful as in non net life? more entirely different more and why? apples and oranges i seem to have more influence here, but my perception is skewed. I can reach more people. If I could reach as many like minded people off the net It would +be the same why read about other places when you can talk to them directly? there are no pretenses here, no worry about what people think of +you...you think it and it shows up on the screen different audience here than in rl ain't that the truth. 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 the majority of the world cannot get to the net we all must pass a few hurdles to get here exactly, or are too stupid/lazy or just plain uninterested 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 on the net, potentially far more people hear my thoughts than in +RL mine too richrd: how's access relate to power? if you look as net.life as just part of rl, its easier to see how +they must influence each other exactly null - u could always do something like, send a letter to the editors +of TIME or somethin,... bookish: the power is potential the access is real nl fits into the rl sphere they are not two poles Yeah, but when I post to USENET, I'm pretty sure it'll get +published. "published" in the sense that it'll get to the point that everyone +can read it but time decides what goes in. Usenet includes everything for +instance andy, only if they have email :) yes, exactly c0 that's true...the net is more accessible...masses media....rather than +mass media...that's my big thing... only a small percentage of people have computers, fewer still have +net access, fewer still irc... and although most of usenet is shit, there is good stuff you will find +there that would never be published in Time so in that sense my "voice" is magnified 2000 people irc at any given time, on a good day so let's wrap this up then with some final thought, summarize What does it mean to be a voice from the net to you all? realtime! i get to talk to people worldwide more than to people in my own +town It means having big thick vocal cords. As a voice "from the net" my thoughts have a certain legitimacy +that "texts" have that mere speech doesn't. I mean, the things I say are "in print" in some sense. yeah i can really be myself 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 Having a "voice from the net" means never having to say, "Hey, +shut up, I'm trying to talk!" 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...= when I speak, my speech disappears but as text, my speech has persistence my thoughts become "part of the record" this is the "new literature" 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 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 ================================= 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.