HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ogi@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I Ogas)
Subject: Re: Cyberpunk music
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 15:02:20 GMT

Hi.

If anyone cares, I interviewed Skinny Puppy (Ogre) last night, and among
other questions, I asked him if he considered  Skinny Puppy a "cyberpunk"
band, and his opinion of the "cyberpunk movement".

He cited other bands as being more consciously and overtly involved
with cyberpunk (e.g., Front Line Assembly), bud added that he felt Skinny
puppy had many elements of cyberpunk which he felt were relevant:
use of high-technology and electronics; punk attitude; alienation and
anger at huge institutions of government and commercialism; overwhelmed
by info and mainstream pop culture.

But he also said that Skinny Puppy was much more personal -- the 
dark aural landscapes arising from within his soul, rather than fitting to 
a specific agenda.   Of course, to me , that sounds like exactly what
I would expect a "cyberpunk" to do -- react and lash out out the systemin an 
idiosyncratic  and personal manner.

If anybody cwould like a transcript of his other responses, maybe I could
sned them to you.


- o g i
From: mcr@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Michele Rizack)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: new thread: what will the world look like?
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:32:52 GMT
Reply-To: mcr@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Michele Rizack)
Distribution: alt
Organization: Columbia University Academic Computing

I'd just like to point out that there are *already* religious fanatics
who claim that the computer is the devil's handiwork.  

There's an interesting book out now, by someone who believes that we
should get rid of most of the techonology we've developed because it's
warped us.  I don't have the ref on hand, but it's reviewed in the
Whole Earth Review (who've done lots of articles on cyberstuff as
well).

I've read too many science fiction books to decide about the faraway
future.  But I do have faith that cyberspace will include alot of
things first told about in stories.

/michelin <mcr@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
"OK, now let's look at four dimensions on the blackboard."
                -- Dr. Joy
Disclaimer: These are my opinions, so there!
Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
From: rand@smartstar.com (Rand McKinney)
Subject: Re: Intent (was Re: Photo of minor, etc./Virtual Ethics)
Organization: SmartStar Corp. / Signal Technolgy Inc.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 21:17:58 GMT

In article <1992Apr09.154855.14904@mongrel.uucp> 
amdunn@mongrel.uucp (Andrew M. Dunn) writes:
>
>But is there a crime of "Intented murder"?   Seems to me the question,
>as asked, was "Is intent ALONE enough to convict?".  ATTEMPTED murder
>has two elements... the Intent, and the failed Attempt.
>
>Can I be charged with thinking "I'm gonna kill that s.o.b.!" ???
>No.  I have to try to kill him first.
>
I think George Orwell called this "thoughtcrime".  I sure hope it never
becomes a reality!

One point, though: if you *express* your intent in some way, 
then it can be considered a crime.  For example, people are arrested for 
saying they are going to assasinate the president, or threatening to do 
violence of some kind.  I think this is sort of a gray area, though...
They may not make it stick if all you say is: "I'd like to kill him,"
in a rhetorical sort of way, rather than 
"I AM going to kill him, and here's how..."

Also--I think that some Christians believe that commiting a sin 
"in your heart" is morally the same as actually doing it. 
Of course, this is a moral rather than a legal judgement.

Rand

Xref: sparky alt.sex:14122 alt.cyberpunk:2044 misc.legal:9166
From: swisher@cs.utexas.edu (Janet M. Swisher)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: voodoo in Gibson yet again
Date: 16 Apr 1992 18:32:06 -0500
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: boogie.cs.utexas.edu


In article <1992Apr16.145526.1583@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> br105@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeffrey A. Del Col) writes:
>
>Okay, okay, I agree.  It certainly seems that at least some of the
>weird goings on in the matrix can be traced to the dump of the
>T/A cores. But not all of them.  When Angie queries Continuity,
>the machne entity suggests that there are two possible 
>explanations for what happened when it chnaged.  The first, which the 
>machine ignores in favor of a cybernetic explanation, is that the 
>matrix is being visited by things outside it.  

It's not clear to me that the entities which "inhabit" the net must
necessarily come from outside it.

>And of course, at the end of MLO, the matrix crowd is 
>heading off to meet The Other, the possible alternative to the
>Hoodoo's being the products of human agency.

But the Finn states that the net split up into hoodoos when it became
aware of the Other.  I read this to mean that the net-consciousness
freaked out, couldn't cope, and split into multiple personalities when
it encountered the Other -- not that the Other caused the split
intentionally.
From: br105@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeffrey A. Del Col)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: AI Solipsism
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:41:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr17.154100.13600
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)


Maybe an AI wouldn't be able to conceive of a world as being made
up of anything except matrix entities like itself.  By the end of
MLO the major characters have all been absorbed into the mmatrix.
They don't exist in n any other form.  They've all becomme software
and electronic impulses.  That's the only way they can be real to
Wiontermute, maybe.  Of course they are all now just like the Dixie 
Flati  Flatline was, constructs subject to erasure.  I guess this
is something of what I was hinting at when I suggested that an AI 
couldn't see outside itself.  

As for the odd postings about demons, etc.  I have no idea what
that's about.  

The Turing Police, though depicted as "bad guys" may have been on to 
something.  An AI could, as Wintermute demonstrates, mmake matrix
existence so attractive as to make people willing to become part of
it.  

Although V/V enthusiast.  Although V/R enthusiasts tout as the
greatest thing since sliced bread, I still think of it as an
essentially impoverished world interpreted by gizmmos and the
limits of the software writers imagination.

Thanks for the discussions, though.  My students have to be 
dragooned into reading anything, and the idea of tossing around
concepts just for the fun of it is utterly alien to most of
them.

J. Del Col
From: 900377c@aucs.acadiau.ca (Robert Campbell)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Virtual food
Summary: You know, you eat it!
Keywords: food, edibility, less-filling, tastes great
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:00:17 GMT
Organization: Acadia University

This was something I thought about in the shower this morning. All
this talk about teledildonics, ethics in c-space and various other
tidbits got me thinking about Virtual Food. Y'know, you've been zooming
through the nets, you're feeling hungry so you pop into your favorite
fast-food joint and pig out. Looks good, tastes great and you don't
even feel bloated. Why, I'll bet if you ate enough Virtual Veggies,
you could probably even be healthier than before you... Hey! Wait!
Don't press the 'n' yet, I'm not...

RC
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: William Gibson's next novel....
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Keywords: William Gibson
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1992 18:46:54 GMT

In article <1992Mar31.231258.4312@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c9e-al@danube.Berkeley.EDU (Chua Hak Lien) writes:

>Taken from today's SF Chronicle:-
>"  Science-fiction author William Gibson, the man who envisioned virtual
>reality in his 1986 novel, "Neuromancer," before the concept was a reality,
>will publish his next book, "Agrippa ( A Book of the Dead )," on computer
>disk, and only computer disk, reports Entertainment Weekly. And the words
>will stay in the computer because Gibson plans to infect the disk with a
>virus that will make it impossible to transfer the text to paper."

Probably the least of the false "facts" in that report is that NEUROMANCER
was published in 1986. It was, in fact, published in '84.


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,     |"Les vrais paradis sont les paradis
mnemonic@eff.org | qu'on a perdus."
(617) 864-0665   | 
EFF, Cambridge   |          --Marcel Proust
From: swisher@cs.utexas.edu (Janet M. Swisher)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Term in Gibson's "Mona Lisa Overdrive"
Date: 16 Apr 1992 00:24:52 -0500
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: boogie.cs.utexas.edu

In article <31704@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike) writes:
>	And it's also (cannot recall which specific books) stated in
>fairly (heh) plain English that the gods in the net were created
>when the T-A AI (Wintermute & Neuromancer, I suppose) "became a part
>of something larger" (or whatever the precise wording is) --
>basically released upon the Net.  At that time it became aware of
>another entity -- in another star system -- and that's what somehow
>created the gods of which Gibson talks about.
>	So...while that explanation of mine isn't exactly, oh,
>CLEAR, that's what I recall from reading the books.

Specifically, see the discussion between Angie and Continuity on pp.
129-30 (MLO, paperback) concerning "When It Changed".  Continuity says
that "When It Changed" was approximately fifteen years before.  Since
the events in each book are about 7-8 years after the previous one, I
infer that this means that "It Changed" because of the events in
Neuromancer.  Also see the conversation among Angie, Bobby, Colin and
the Finn on the last two pages of MLO.  I think these two passages
provide most of the basis for Bryce's interpretation, which is also
mine.

Sorry if I sound too analytical, but I figure it beats everybody
posting what they sorta, kinda vaguely remember.

Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
From: wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Hamill)
Subject: Re: Virtual Ethics
Followup-To: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:42:00 GMT

In article kim3@husc10.harvard.edu (Jason Kim) writes:
>In article wooledge@ces.cwru.edu (Gregory Wooledge) writes:
>
>>Our technology is increasing, and our consumption of role-model images is
>>becoming more widespread.  But such trends have existed throughout history
>>and they haven't destroyed us yet.  I'd consider it to be simply a
>>manifestation of man's desire to improve himself.
>
>I would hardly call Molly Millions or Johnny Mnemonic role models who will
>help society improve itself :).
>
>My opinion is that when the day comes (in about 100 years!) that the world is
>connected by a virtual reality network, people will no longer feel the need 
>to improve their physical appearances, as their interpersonal relationships 
>will be based mainly on their cyberspace aliases. You see, first of all, 
>since in a VR world a person can take whatever form he or she desires, the
>feeling that we present-day people experience of not being able to make our-
>selves look good will disappear. If Mary has what it takes to attract Bubba
>and she knows it, her confidence in herself will be such that she won't care
>about not looking like Kathy Ireland in the physical world.
>
Try "Synners" by Pat Cadigan.  She explores this area of VR personnae
versus actual physical appearance in some depth.  Well worth reading 
in and of itself, with some insights relevant to this discussion and,
in particular, to Jason's thoughts I quoted above.

---tom

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l
l      CRUSH---CompassionRespectUnderstandingSelfHonesty---CRUSH      l
l         How could you have ever lived your life without it?         l
l               Join Now, Apply Within.  Spread the word.             l
l_________________________         ---me, trying to save the world,   l
l wcstom@ccs.carleton.ca l                         from itself.       l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ahawks@isis.cs.du.edu (andy)
Subject: Re: Virtual food
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: food, edibility, less-filling, tastes great
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 06:41:34 GMT

In article <900377c.702946817@aucs> 900377c@aucs.acadiau.ca (Robert Campbell)
writes: 

| This was something I thought about in the shower this morning. All
| this talk about teledildonics, ethics in c-space and various other
| tidbits got me thinking about Virtual Food. Y'know, you've been zooming
| through the nets, you're feeling hungry so you pop into your favorite
| fast-food joint and pig out. Looks good, tastes great and you don't
| even feel bloated. Why, I'll bet if you ate enough Virtual Veggies,
| you could probably even be healthier than before you... Hey! Wait!
| Don't press the 'n' yet, I'm not...
| 
| RC

Virtu-McDonald's??  I think you've touched on a new cultural low-point here..
(No, actually virtual Taco Bell would have to be the lowest point [virtual
gas!])..."Either 0 or 3 billion served, depending on your perspective"...

Actually, this whole topic of how deep virtual-sensations could actually run is
quite interesting...The external aspects of touch, sight, hearing are quite
obvious, but once you get into taste and smell, that could get interesting...
Could pose an interesting debate on just how deeply we want to explore VR...

For example, what if in the future it was possible to release viruses into VR
worlds..Could you imagine how devestating (or maybe even delightfully
confusing) the possibilities could be?  Say for example a Vietnam vet goes into
his own little VR World, but I've secretly implanted sounds and images into his
"trip" that remind him of his experiences in that war - so, it might
"virtually" be possible to induce someone into a permanent psychosis.

Another thought - it is a popular myth (maybe fact, I don't know) that if a
person "sees" themself die in their dream, that person suffers some sort of
heart attack or other physical trauma or something - so, I wonder what
consequences, if any, there would be if a person saw themselves die in their
virtual reality?  Would that induce any physical trauma?  If so, it would be
possible for "virtual murder" to be a reality...

(Forgive me if any of these things are being discussed in that "Virtual Ethics"
thread - I put it in my KILL file....hmm, maybe I should take it out now..)

--


ahawks@isis.cs.du.edu						andy

Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:2046 rec.arts.sf.written:5695
From: ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: William Gibson's next novel....
Date: 11 Apr 92 13:38:50 GMT

From: ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud)
>From: tmaddox@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom Maddox)
>>
>>	You don't get it.  This is not in any sense a security program; it's 
>>*art*--whether good, bad, interesting or uninteresting, is another matter, but
>>art.
>>
>Of course it's art--it doesn't work, so it can't be technology.

Perhaps I was being too snide.  It could work as part of the package.  You pay
lots of money for a limited edition of the program.  You slot it, run it, and
in the end, it's *gone*.  Almost like the original "piece de resistance"
machines.

(Philistine that I am, I'd still make a backup first.)
Xref: sparky alt.sex:14271 alt.cyberpunk:2061 misc.legal:9201
From: positron@caen.engin.umich.edu (Jonathan Scott Haas)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Virtual Ethics
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:04:21 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <1992Apr8.204032.24041@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> wooledge@ces.cwru.edu (Gregory Wooledge) writes:
>
> In the earlier part of this century we didn't have airbrushed Playboy models

Just an aside here, but I wanted to point out that Playboy does not
airbrush or otherwise alter their photographs.
--
__/\__  Jonathan S. Haas         | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\    /  University of Michigan   | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_  _\  positron@engin.umich.edu | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
  \/    Positron @ Hero MUD II   | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.
Xref: sparky alt.sex:13864 alt.cyberpunk:2012 misc.legal:9054
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Intent (was Re: Photo of minor, etc./Virtual Ethics)
Date: 9 Apr 92 09:04:00 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <1992Apr8.085017.25172@leland.Stanford.EDU> tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen) writes:
>
>there seems to be some confusion here.  basically, for a criminal
>conviction, the law requires a mens rea (state of mind) and
>actus reus (real act).  intent is one kind of mens rea (the highest
>one - others are knowledge, recklessness, and negligence).
>intent alone is NOT sufficient.
>
>for conspiracy, the defendant must have the intent and have
>committed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
>this is true in all states, as far as i know.

I recommend "The Trial of Dr. Spock" by Jessica Mitford.  Basicly,
Dr. Spock and five other defendents were tried and convicted of
conspiracy to advocate draft resistance.  The prosecuters knew they
didn't have a chance of nailing anybody for advocating draft resistance
because of freedom of speech, but they were able to get a conviction
for conspiracy to do so.  Weird huh?

Not only that, but the "conspirators" DIDN'T EVEN ALL KNOW EACH OTHER.
Some of them had to be introduced by their lawyers.  The conspiracy law
says that you only have to show that the conspirators agreed with
each other (a "meeting of the minds" is the term, I believe.)  Part of
the evidence that was introduced to establish this agreement was an
FBI film of one of the defendents applauding after a speech by another
of the defendents.

The quote that comes to mind from the book is "If a boy steals candy,
that's a misdemeaner.  If two boys plan to steal candy, and then
*don't do it*, that's conspiracy which is a felony."

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	That's one thing about going against the flow:  there's
	less traffic in that direction.
Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:2091 alt.sex:14564 misc.legal:9309
From: csachs@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Colin Sachs)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,alt.sex,misc.legal
Subject: Race is an undefined term...
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:39:36 GMT
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens


As far as I know, no one has ever conducted a study of the human genes of  
different so-called races to compare them (the human genome (pardon the
spelling) project would lead to this though, as long as accurate records
were kept as to the origin of the samples). 

As to "race" and sexuality... culture is the determiner.  Nothing in the
genes, just all that "stuff" surrounding us in terms of societal norms 
(whatever the hell those are).  

As to "interracial" sex... just a term meaning sex with someone whose
skin happens to be different from yours, or who was born elsewhere (usually,
a different country).

Sex is sex.  Humanity defines it and constrains it.

-- 
Colin Sachs - csachs@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (or) an116@freenet-in-a.cwru.edu

	"This inside of my head was exploding with fireworks.  Fortunately,
	my last thought turned out the lights when it left."  - Calvin
Xref: sparky alt.sex:14027 alt.cyberpunk:2036 misc.legal:9115
From: rstevew@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us (Richard Steven Walz)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,alt.cyberpunk,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Virtual Ethics
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 07:58:09 GMT
Organization: The Armory

In article <1992Apr8.152233.10640@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.020359.14390@reed.edu>, mehawk@reed.edu (Michael Sandy) writes:
>
>	[stuff deleted]
>
>> For example:  The Holodeck could accurately simulate people from history,
>> enabling them to physically interact.  Further, it had access to the
>> medical and psychological information in the Enterprise database.  It
>> demonstrated the ability to simulate accurately, (with a crucial detail
>> left out of course), a human being on fragmentary personal information,
>> namely the simulation Geordi worked with and fell in love with.
>
>	[Stuff deleted]
>
>> Would accessing medical information to create an accurate simulation
>> be ethical?  Fun?  Sex education could be interesting if the kids
>> could experiment as they wished.  What about all those awkward crushes
>> which you wouldn't dare tell the object of about?
>
>     I think part of the problem here would be the authority to access a
>person's medical and psychological records. In todays time, people would
>not allow anybody and everybody to see their records. But in the Star
>Trek "universe" things are definately different then they are in the
>world today, so people might not object to other people seeing their
>records.
>

Give us a break. In ten years all it might take is a public domain
video of a person talking for a few seconds to re-create their persona
to have sex with on your home cyberdeck. Even if it took thirty years,
I can remember that far back easy. I was beating off already. You
don't need records, pussy tastes pretty much the same, flesh is like
other flesh. An extrapolated wireframe of a woman and her speech
sample of about thirty seconds might be all you need. Such an invasion
of "privacy" will seem as dumb as when the natives fear our cameras
might steal their souls!  - Steve Walz
From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Term in Gibson's "Mona Lisa Overdrive"
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:48:32 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego


	The "loa" along with Baron Samedi, and many of the other
strange net-things which Gibson is writing about all deal with
Carribean religion(s?).  Or was it African?  One of the two.
	Regardless, the "loa" of which Gibson is talking about is a
direct metaphor...(check out pages 85 and 115 [or thereabouts] in
Count Zero for a little more on this).  The "loa" are the "gods"
which have inhabited the Net.
	[interesting...in David Brin's _Earth_ on page 632 there
seems to be a very direct mention of Gibson's works.  Someone please
correct me if I'm wrong!]

Xref: sparky alt.sex:14003 alt.cyberpunk:2035 misc.legal:9109