Slashdot Mirror
The Technology of Neuromancer After 25 Years
William Gibson's Neuromancer was first published 25 years ago. Dr_Ken writes with an excerpt from an article at MacWorld that delves into the current state of some of the technology that drives the book: "'Neuromancer is important because of its astounding predictive power. Gibson's core idea in the novel is the direct integration of man and computer, with all the possibilities (and horrors) that such a union entails. The book eventually sold more than 160 million copies, but bringing the book to popular attention took a long time and a lot of word-of-mouth. The sci-fi community, however, was acutely aware of the novel's importance when it came out: Neuromancer ran the table on sci-fi's big three awards in 1984, winning the Hugo Award, the Philip K. Dick Memorial Award, and the Nebula Award.'"
When stating the specifications of future computers, never, ever use real units such as "megabytes", because whatever number you use, it will be hopelessly wrong within a few years.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
Gibson is no easy read because he doesn't explain things. He writes as if he wrote a story for someone who lives in that time and needs no explanation of terms and technology. It makes it hard to read, but it also adds a lot to the atmosphere once you got into the mindset.
I don't like stories that explain everything in detail to make it easier for you to read. They take away from the experience IMO.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I read just about all of Gibson's novels the week they came out, and they were super cool... but they have had about zero predictive power.
The word "cyberspace" almost always means that the person using it has no idea what they're talking about. Oh, there are exceptions, but the people who are most taken by Gibson's vision are sorely lacking in insight.
The representation of information as landscapes has been a repeated dead end.
Not believing in the predictive power of Gibson's novels doesn't mean I don't consider them important, it just means I'm aware that they're fiction.
Lord of the Rings is a great cultural artifact without having people yammering on about Ringwraiths being real.
Yeah, there are definitely parts of Neuromancer that are hilariously dated. The one that always sticks out for me is the part where Case has 3MB of stolen RAM that he's trying to move. It sounded impressively futuristic in 1985. Today, not so much.
It's true that he doesn't have any mobile phones and seems to prefer implants, but he had a lot of those that do similar functions to a phone. E.g., Molly has some sort of implant that gives the time, and radio functions and then Case monitors her position through his cyberspace rig (more than just her position, her whole sensory apparatus), of which a video conferencing phone might be considered a clumsy version. Also, throughout the book, one sees people who insert some sort of chip called a "microsoft" into a jack behind their ear that give them some extra knowledge, or some enhancement. When those Bluetooth headsets became popular and people just started wearing them around like they were an item of clothing, it reminded me precisely of those "microsofts" in Neuromancer, or whatever they were called.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
I have a quite contrary view on that. They were all human, and to some degree even the AIs (to an increasing degree over the series of books). They weren't monsters, merely products of their culture.
On the matter of distopia, let see what Gibson has to say on that himself:
I think, you can safely say this over the characters, too. Their behaviour and personality simply reflect the situation they live in. Being a drug dealer and -(ab)users, asocial and delusional is hardly desirable but far from seldom among human, as can be observed in the slums of the large cities around the world.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
Everybody likes to focus on the technology when discussing William Gibson, but the real focus of his stories have always been about the psychology/sociology/culture of the people in his books.
Take the Bridge Trilogy. The virtual glasses which (in part) drive the stories are simply plot macguffins. The real focus of the stories is the San Francisco-Oakland bridge and the people on it, which is decidedly low-tech - an interstitial, lawless zone, where, due to the class divide, the city's poor and homeless have taken residency, living in makeshift cabins strapped to the suspension cables. A metalsmith on the bridge forges knife blades, hammered out of motorcycle chains, giving them a damascus-like blade, while a vendor sells soup from a pot that is never emptied, rather continuously adding new ingredients... the 'wild folk' living on the bridge are feared by those living on land, but on the bridge itself, there is a sense of cooperation and fellowship.
Compare to the real-life (and now demolished) city of Kowloon.
Anyway, if you focus too much on the tech, you're missing the point.