Linux Cookie

...cyberpunk wants to see the mind as mechanistic & duplicable,
challenging basic assumptions about the nature of individuality & self.
That seems all the better reason to assume that cyberpunk art & music is
essentially mindless garbagio. Willy certainly addressed this idea in
"Count Zero," with Katatonenkunst, the automatic box-maker and the girl's
observation that the real art was the building of the machine itself,
rather than its output.
-- Eliot Handelman

It might be worth reflecting that this group was originally created
back in September of 1987 and has exchanged over 1200 messages.  The
original announcement for the group called for an all inclusive
discussion ranging from the writings of Gibson and Vinge and movies
like Bladerunner to real world things like Brands' description of the
work being done at the MIT Media Lab.  It was meant as a haven for
people with vision of this scope.  If you want to create a haven for
people with narrower visions, feel free.  But I feel sad for anyone
who thinks that alt.cyberpunk is such a monstrous group that it is in
dire need of being subdivided.  Heaven help them if they ever start
reading comp.arch or rec.arts.sf-lovers.
-- Bob Webber

...I don't care for the term 'mechanistic'. The word 'cybernetic' is a lot
more apropos. The mechanistic world-view is falling further and further behind
the real world where even simple systems can produce the most marvellous
chaos.
-- Peter da Silva

As for the basic assumptions about individuality and self, this is the core
of what I like about cyberpunk. And it's the core of what I like about certain
pre-gibson neophile techie SF writers that certain folks here like to put
down. Not everyone makes the same assumptions. I haven't lost my mind... it's
backed up on tape.
-- Peter da Silva

Who are the artists in the Computer Graphics Show?  Wavefront's latest box, or
the people who programmed it?  Should Mandelbrot get all the credit for the
output of programs like MandelVroom?
-- Peter da Silva

Trailing Edge Technologies is pleased to announce the following
TETflame programme:

1) For a negotiated price (no quatloos accepted) one of our flaming
   representatives will flame the living shit out of the poster of
   your choice. The price is inversly proportional to how much of
   an asshole the target it. We cannot be convinced to flame Dennis
   Ritchie. Matt Crawford flames are free.

2) For a negotiated price (same arrangement) the TETflame programme
   is offering ``flame insurence''. Under this arrangement, if
   one of our policy holders is flamed, we will cancel the offending
   article and flame the flamer, to a crisp.

3) The TETflame flaming representatives include: Richard Sexton, Oleg
   Kisalev, Diane Holt, Trish O'Tauma, Dave Hill, Greg Nowak and our most
   recent aquisition, Keith Doyle. But all he will do is put you in his
   kill file. Weemba by special arrangement.

-- Richard Sexton

"As I was walking among the fires of Hell, delighted with the enjoyments of
 Genius; which to Angels look like torment and insanity.  I collected some of
 their Proverbs..." - Blake, "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell"

                        HOW TO PROVE IT, PART 1

proof by example:
        The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it
        contains most of the ideas of the general proof.

proof by intimidation:
        'Trivial'.

proof by vigorous handwaving:
        Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.

                        HOW TO PROVE IT, PART 2

proof by cumbersome notation:
        Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special
        symbols.

proof by exhaustion:
        An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.

proof by omission:
        'The reader may easily supply the details'
        'The other 253 cases are analogous'
        '...'

                        HOW TO PROVE IT, PART 3

proof by obfuscation:
        A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless
        syntactically related statements.

proof by wishful citation:
        The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of
        a theorem from the literature to support his claims.

proof by funding:
        How could three different government agencies be wrong?

proof by eminent authority:
        'I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-
        complete.'