Hacker News Reader

Comment by narrator | Hacker News Reader

>"Cyberspace, as described in Neuromancer, is nothing at all like the Internet that we live with, which consists mostly of utterly banal and silly stuff."

Ultimately, there are a lot of boring and average intelligence people in the world who spend a lot of time doing banal boring practical stuff and have always liked low brow entertainment. The Internet reflects that.

View on HN

I think one of the things it was easy to miss in 1984 when Neuromancer was published was how accessible the internet and computers is. I've watched two year olds interact with the modern internet.

If you have a system with a high barrier to entry -- like computers where in 1984 and as they are described in Neuromancer -- it's safe to assume that a lot of "boring" and "average" people wouldn't use it. At the time Microsoft's unofficial mission was "a computer on every [office] desk, and in every home, running Microsoft software". It sounded overly ambitious, even into the 90s.

You're confusing the map with the territory I think. It's safe to say that Gibson's early work is full of insinuations.

He zooms into specific criminal subcultures and describes them in detail but that doesn't mean that the rest of society follows the same principles. It's pretty obvious that there is plenty of "banal" and "average" in the Sprawl trilogy, it's just not overtly described because what would be the point?.

The same is true today. There is excitement and novelty to be found on the Internet. But it's certainly not going to be discovered by the sheep, the 99% that spend their time on Instagram, Youtube and Amazon. Similar characters to the ones found in Gibson's books exist, but similarly, are not visible from the popular sphere.

In that sense, Gibson definitely misses the mark when he describes the Internet today but that's to be expected. The genius of his early work lies in it being IMAGINED, or channeled if you will. Definitely not reasoned. Somehow his imagination tapped into the technological currents that define us today.

Now, having lost his imagination and overcompensating with reason, he has become yet another sheep and his view reflects that.

Interestingly, a decade later, both Tad William's Otherland (1996), and Neal Stephenson's Snowcrash (1992) described networked virtual realities which everyday normal people had access to, but they were referred to as "Ken and Barbies" or similar. Their use of off-the-shelf avatars and no custom software gave them away. And the Techno-elites still had their own spaces within these worlds that were either off-limits or hard to find.

Something happened between 1984 and 1992 where imagining a virtual world had to include large numbers of everyday people.

One thing futurists always got wrong about the Internet was how much porn there would be.

One might have run the risk of being called a delusional pervert if one had correctly anticipated the massive scale that online sex work has grown to since the dawn of the internet.

I don't think there is really that much more porn being produced on a per-person basis, just that where they used to be Polaroids that would be lost to time now all of the porn can be distributed worldwide instantly for free. Someone who sat down and worked the numbers might have come to this realization early on, but few people realized exactly what it means to give everybody the means to be their own publisher.

I think there probably is a lot more porn being produced on a per-person basis. We have a lot more cameras and a lot more ways to share photos/videos now.

I think there is a lot more content in general being produced too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com