Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Bruce Sterling
kpost writes "Reason magazine has an
interview
with Bruce Sterling." Fairly lengthy and entertaining interview for you bookworms out there. Covers a lot of different subjects.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
How many people clicked on the link only to discover you weren't interested in Bruce Suchandsuch.. tell us who he is in the main section please :)
He is right to the point, it doesn't really matter what the RIAA, MPAA and their cronies do, they surely can't stop us, it might have worked in the past, but now we control the information paths and they can't do anything except scare those who haven't got access to the sources of information that we do.
I wish more people like him were in politics, that way maybe we'd be better off.
He's also one hell of a writer.
You have been warned.
"I'm not really all that interested in what Hollywood does with its stuff. I mean, they're only the size of the porn industry."
:)
I think that says it all
Yet they were modded up. Morons.
Wow. I hadn't recognized that pr0n is not only comparable to organized crime, drug dealing and child abuse but was also an explicit indicator of the end times. I was thought it was one of the main reasons there WAS an internet in the first place.
There is also Bruce's yearly visit to the Well's Inkwell.vue: The 2004 Bruce Sterling State of the World Address.
And, don't forget Bruce's new weblog at Wired: Beyond the Beyond.
thanks for the link... i read "rod serling" at first. although i was impressed that someone managed to score an interview with a dead guy.
2 1337 4 u!
But it is a good icon for Bruce, no?
Bruce Sterling. What is it all about... is it good, or is it whack?
Everybody likes to think himself a visionary, but really it's only the rich and well-connected who get a chance to get books published and present their boring and ineptly-constructed visionary views. Bruce Sterling is such a person.
THANKS GOD they modded him offtopic.
I'd ascribe this to malice rather than stupidity. I suspect the link was good early and then redirected to the awfulness. Then all the warnings have been modded as trolls...
ITYM He may be a brilliant man when it comes to writing about crypto.
Yep, that Bayou.com/~woodward person has done this before: posted a mirror then switches the site to Goatse or whatever. Plus that post got modded up VERY quickly (it was score 3 before there were 5 posts in the whole article), so likely karmawhore friends of his knew he was posting that beforehand.
Um... you sure you're not confusing Bruce Sterling (the sci-fi/cyberpunk novelist we're talking about here) with Bruce Schneier (the guy who wrote Applied Cryptography, among other things?)
-- Open Source: It's mad, but you don't have to work here to help.
Ah well, can always hope I get to meta-mod...
drugs are bad for you
I don't label myself as either liberal or conservitive, I think mostly because I've never understood how you people come up with what side of an issue to be on. Aren't republicans supposed to be the "ra ra personal freedom" party, and democrats the "Why is nobody thinking of the children!!!" party? It just seems like you all simply jump to attack whatever position the opposing party takes, even if your own ideology agrees with it.
That's Bruce Schneier (Crypto God). This is Bruce Sterling (Cyperpunk Something).
... but experimenting with technology is. Palladium and similar technologies which are largely motivated by the desire to prevent us from unautorized playing movies, may as a side effect prevent us from experimenting with technology. If we can only run authorized programs, plug in authorized hardware, and browse authorized content, how can we experiment with new programs, new hardware or new content?
Seriously, though, you need to broaden your perspective a little bit if you find the current politicians (Democrats most emphatically included) in the US (and I can only assume from the rest of your comment that you are a USAan) left wing.
pr0n was considered the most dangerous aspect of the computer networks. In particular, people under the age 21 migth be exposed to nude people, or even worse, nude people having sex, and thus have their entire life ruined.
It does seem to me that this attitude has been relexed a lot the last few years, probably because the net has given most people easy access to pr0n, taking some of the mystique away.
the rise of Christianity was the cause of the decline of the Roman empire. Romans from the Republic through the Empire loved sculptures, friezes, drawings, plays and festivals all of which could be considered pornographic.
Seriously, though, you need to broaden your perspective a little bit if you find the current politicians (Democrats most emphatically included) in the US (and I can only assume from the rest of your comment that you are a USAan) left wing.
I just find it more interesting that he thinks the idea of controlling cryptography (or any technology for that matter) is not left wing.
When the Republicans give us medicare prescription drug plans we have to wonder if there even is still a right wing outside of the ultra-religious groups (many of which probably would still give us a medicare prescription drug plan).
-PainKilleR-[CE]
No other reason for this post. kthx.
668.5
Ignoring the fact you've got the wrong Bruce...
You're assuming that restricting cryptography would stop them getting it. This seems to me to be an assumption without any evidence. The US didn't stop the rest of the world getting strong crypto when they tried to restrict it before, because the rest of the world also has the people who have the skills needed to devise or implement crypto. Why do you think that anything different would be true in the future?
I keep reading Sterling hoping to see what all the rest of you are apparently seeing, but all I get it someone deeply, deeply in love with hearing his own clever ideas, usually couched in some nebulously sardonic comment that makes it oh-so-hip.
Some random snippets...
"Socially, policy makers have made a series of choices very similar to what preceded the collapse into World War I."
Huh? Like?
"we've really turned our backs on a world that could have been pleasant, delight-ful, peaceful, and technocratic. Now we face a world that is religious, narrow-minded, fundamentalist, and violent."
This is precisely the sort of vapid utopianism that begs so many questions it's meaningless. Really? How did "we" turn our backs on it Bruce?
"Sure, we hate Exxon because they're huge and they're everywhere." Personally, it seems a little L.Ron Hubbard-y to contrive a eco-social movement with designated hate subjects, if not downright Nineteenth Century. Wouldn't it be more intrinsically interesting to try to understand the reflexive envy in a society that's not all that zero-sum anymore? Doesn't Bruce feel some irony in poking at Ellison's "proper" enemies, when his own cachet cows look as stereotypically sacred as anyone elses?
I dunno. He's just got this 'end of history' thing cooking, looking for the McGuffin in a story that's just a stream-of-consciousness monologue. He keeps trying to refer to "the real story" or the very-much-italicized "truth", but I don't see how he manages it with a straight face. Maybe he's laughing all the way to the bank. I still cannot find the kernel of tangibility he seems to keep flourishing.
It's probably just me.
-Styopa
I am a "bookworm" and have never heard of him. Is he scifi or something? A little more info my garner a bit more interest in the subject.
Aren't republicans supposed to be the "ra ra personal freedom" party, and democrats the "Why is nobody thinking of the children!!!" party?
Stereotypically, Reps are "in favor of economic freedom" and Dems are "in favor of personal freedom."
The fact is, both parties are opposed to both personal & economic freedom.
It just seems like you all simply jump to attack whatever position the opposing party takes, even if your own ideology agrees with it.
Bingo. If GWB changed to the Dems on Jan 21, 2001, yet otherwise did everything else exactly the same as he done, the "Bush haters" would consider him to be one of the top two Presidents in US history.
This is what reaally turns me off with these guys. Their only beef with him is that he has an "R" after his name. They cannot come up with anything substantive, because in order to do so, they would have to repudiate socialism.
One may say, "What about the war in Iraq?" The same people who are "anti-war" today didn't have a problem with war vs. Iraq in 1998 when someone on their team was waging it.
I want to know why the recipient is "indicated" instead of "indicted."
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
"Id like to see what people can do with the Internet that they cannot do on paper. And there are certain things one can do that are not worth doing. Like I can set up a discussion group thats open to everybody! And that is not worth doing. Its sort of proven that it immediately turns into a cesspool because its badly designed." haha!
It clearly says that it the real sender was disguised so they won't get mail bombs, which explains why they include their street address at the end. It couldn't really be from Germany because most Germans have a better grasp of English and wouldn't make that many spelling and grammar errors. :)
"Probably the single thing I do personally that reduces the crude havoc on the Internet is avoiding the Windows OS. Use a Mac, for heaven's sake. Stop adding to the pollution of viruses, and stop offering slave machines that spew spam for others."
- Bruce Sterling
Source: 2004 Bruce Sterling State of the World Address
-kgj
The man mentions Porn in one form or another five times, makes a reference to blow up dolls, and in general blames porn for many of the problems in the world. Then he puts porn on the same level as mafia crime, pedophilia, and drugs.
The man is spewing little more than dogma and slashdotters admire this man?
Maybe its because everyone respects his obviously repressed urges to ogle massive amounts of pictures of nekkid women.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
... it's about mass customization ...
/. submission on the question of why car manufacturers aren't aren't offering fully modularlized vehicles - sort of like you start with a front end option, add a drive-train option, add a rear option (so you get a lot of Ranchero-like hybrids). The best profits are in the vehicles people see more utility in (like pickup trucks) - this way you see more utility for you.
Work up this morning from a dream in which I was framing a
Maybe the carmakers are afraid that such modular creations wouldn't have as much brand identity, that the brand would effectively be more the individual customer than the manufacturer. But why should that matter if it sells? And think about the downstream revenue - get in a fender-bender, just replace that module - less work for repair shops, more orders to the factory.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
You mean this:
/ pr oducts/adv_tech/autonomy1_010702.html
http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/environment
...to shut up.
Thank you.
OUCH - my inronimeter is pegged! (and it's a Fluke digital)
Oh man, I wish I were a cartoonist, that is too funny to pass up...
The question arises:
Has anyone ever seen Jon Katz and Bruce Sterling in the same room at the same time?
Seastead this.
Bruce is in the midst of a two week discussion about the state of the world hosted by the WELL. You can post a comment or ask a question directly to the topic if you're a WELL member; if not, you can send a comment or question to inkwell-hosts at well.com, and they'll post it for you.
Jon Lebkowsky jonl@polycot.com http://www.polycot.com
care to explain
On a positive note, they ended the series after the first book. Thats the same thing writers like L Ron Hubbard or Phillip Jose Farmer should have learned how to do.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
"There's a fringe for people who like blowup dolls, but in point of fact there's very little going on there that hasn't been going on since the advent of the birth control pill."
Sterling is an also-ran compared to Gibson. His book "Distraction" (84,204th on Amazon) is the only science fiction book I couldn't finish due to boredom. Gibson is far more popular (Neuromancer, 1,009th) even though a lot of his conjectures did not pan out (i.e., Japanese ascendency). When Sterling co-authored "Difference Engine" (54,784) with Gibson it quite simply sucked. Bruce Sterling is the Peter Straub of his genre (Straub even makes Stephen King unreadable).
All the books I cite here have been out for at least a couple of years to prove a point: Sterling is not a popular writer or a great futurist like Arthur C. Clarke ("Childhood's End", 54,784th). And his books do not have staying power (Robert Heinlein, "Starship Trooper", 7,816th; H.G. Wells, "The Time Machine", 7,538th).
I want to know why the recipient is "indicated" instead of "indicted."
Ya gotta "point the finger" before you "throw the book."
The point is you've heard of the man and have an opinion based on having read him. Our friend above belives all Sci-Fi is "not meaningful" and he bases this opinion on having read Satre, Fulkner and Hemingway
(which is not Sci-Fi for those of you irony deprived.)
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...
Sorry if I ranted for a moment there, but Bruce Stirling annoys me nearly as much as people who don't consider sci-fi/fantasy "meaningful". ;-)
I remember back in high school not being able to do a book report on "The Lord of the Rings" because it wasn't considered "serious" literature. Tolkien was Professor of Anglo-Saxon (Old English) at the University of Oxford. I think he knew a thing or two about literature.
He and Gibson started Cyberpunk.
Uhhh... no.
John Brunner was writing stuff like Shockwave Rider w a-a-a-a-a-a- y before either of those two.
For that matter, some of Phillip K. Dick's stuff and that of a dozen others was pretty doggone relevant back when Gibson and Sterling were still in nappies. Delany certainly is on that list of earlier folks, as is Bester.
For tone, I'ld go with Cordwainer Smith or even Van Vogt.
Lem? Funny as hell, smart and sharp. But I wouldn't classify him as cyberpunk.
Silly though his tone may be, some of Harry Harrison's stuff has some pretty good cpunkish meat under all the sugar.
Don't get me wrong, I love Stirling's and Gibson's work. Just reread Globalhead for that matter (fifth time?). But "started"? Uh-uh.
Rustin
Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.
Click here!
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
but that website doesn't print fer sh!t in Opera.