Live data from Hacker News

Cyberpunk is dead?

w3.cultdeadcow.com

21–30 of 67 posts

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#21

This piece reads awfully. I haven't seen anything like this since trying to understand inscrutable postmodernist literary criticism at college. I am very interested in this, but I'm having a lot of trouble understanding it. What's he trying to say? Todays market of representations means that we exchange images that are valued by statements without consequence, statements whose only value is the one of attention, some…

I have a hunch this was written by a non-native English speaker (see the quote usage near the beginning).

Anyway, I think he's saying that our faces, which allow us to communicate without words (the last sentence of your quote), are now nothing more than static images/advertisements (e.g., profile pictures). Communication on social networks has been reduced to using advertising techniques to gain attention.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#22
post #20

The article defines punk (in general) as a deviant subculture that parents are afraid of. Perhaps the general decline of punk can be attributed to modern parents being much less afraid than parents in the 70s. Cyberpunk isn't really exciting when your parents all have iPhones.

I'm not sure why Anonymous does not fit the article's definition.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#23

This piece reads awfully. I haven't seen anything like this since trying to understand inscrutable postmodernist literary criticism at college. I am very interested in this, but I'm having a lot of trouble understanding it. What's he trying to say? Todays market of representations means that we exchange images that are valued by statements without consequence, statements whose only value is the one of attention, some…

I have to confess, I've got a sort of fondness for this writing style. It's got a certain rythm that makes everything seem more... impactful than it really is.

edit: of course, what I meant to say was:

While aesthetically confusing on a surface level, the subcurrent of ryhtmic tonality in these disquisitions impacts the reader's thought process in subliminal ways. Hitherto the paragon of collegiate studies, these textual discourses nowadays propagate freely in the super-plebeian fantasy-made-reality cyber-utopia that is the infosphere. The parentally linked-to hypertext is a two-fold example of not only the skillfull mastery of the avant-poetic style, but also the post-print arrangement common in todays socioeconomic conditions.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the advances in EEG and other brain scan techs, I believe direct neural interfaces aren't that far away anymore. One step at a time, we'll first have to get used to motion-based interfaces. Neural interfaces will probably be like moving a limb but not actually moving. With such interfaces, there is no reason anymore to restrict to planar screens. Everything can be 3D. For buying stuff you're right -- just click…

Videoconferencing and telepresence is big business. I expect those applications will lead the way, with the technology being adapted for entertainment purposes soon after.

Yes, I agree here too, telepresence would be a pretty good reason. But even then, that's probably actually less useful than just a videoconferencing system, since you could continue to have your hands/eyes free for other things like taking notes or whatever at the same time.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#25

This piece reads awfully. I haven't seen anything like this since trying to understand inscrutable postmodernist literary criticism at college. I am very interested in this, but I'm having a lot of trouble understanding it. What's he trying to say? Todays market of representations means that we exchange images that are valued by statements without consequence, statements whose only value is the one of attention, some…

I interpret it as "kids this days like them lolcats".

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#26
Cyberpunk got somehow stuck in mirror shades and virtual reality worlds, and then wandered off into the artistic fringe.

There was also very little grasp of programming by the cyberpunk writers that I've read. No understanding of the Cyber part of the Punk. That would have increased its ability to stay relevant.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#27
post #20

The article defines punk (in general) as a deviant subculture that parents are afraid of. Perhaps the general decline of punk can be attributed to modern parents being much less afraid than parents in the 70s. Cyberpunk isn't really exciting when your parents all have iPhones.

I'm not sure why Anonymous does not fit the article's definition.

They do, explicitly:

Contrary to this, CHAN-culture (imageboards, fast communication channels) and the ANON-meme (crowd orientated cyber actions) try different ways in waging real mass-based cyberwars, they reach this point by being more punk again, punk as in: deviant subculture that parents are afraid of.

I read this as saying that Anonymous and 4chan (and friends) have reached the point of being punk again, in that sense.

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#28
post #4
post #2

The problem with cyberpunk is that it's no longer the future, it's the present. Sometimes when I read the news I've got the idea we're kind of living in a dystopian 90's cyberpunk future... When it's the new normal it makes sense that the word is "dead" as a denominator.

My thoughts exactly. I don't mean to threadjack, but I'm running a new startup where I'm building augmented reality displays ( http://gothameyewear.com/ if anyone is interested -- haven't posted it here before, simply because there's not much there), and I occasionally have that "well shit, it's the future" realization in working on it. We may not be in the 2011 of Shadowrun, but we'll have decks soon -- they'll be o…

I am a college student looking to do research on wearable computers and interface designs for this kind of device. Looking for interns?

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Videoconferencing and telepresence is big business. I expect those applications will lead the way, with the technology being adapted for entertainment purposes soon after.

Yes, I agree here too, telepresence would be a pretty good reason. But even then, that's probably actually less useful than just a videoconferencing system, since you could continue to have your hands/eyes free for other things like taking notes or whatever at the same time.

I don't agree it'll be less useful. Actual telepresence has a lot more possibilities than just a video stream.

You could interact with people in the virtual environment, build or design something together, brainstorm in new ways (For example, imagine architects designing a building while walking in it in realtime), and take notes digitally. Once you can do everything in the virtual "world", you don't need your hands/eyes free for other things.

(and I'm sure there will be a pop-up HUD interface in which you can do other things if you really want to be distracted like browsing HN during a meeting :).

Re: Cyberpunk is dead?

#30

Not dead, just moved. I think the whole bitcoin thing is very cyberpunk-ish. A digital crypto-currency.

Spot on. Also, browsing pages on Tor and similar networks reminds me a lot of exploring the internet in the early '90s. It's messy, there are lots of abandoned, hastily put together pages. There are weird rants. The internet that the author misses is still out there. It's just not as close to the surface as it was in the early days of the internet or BBS.

"It's just not as close to the surface as it was in the early days of the internet or BBS."

Precisely. I'll add that today that 'underground' is a very small (yet important, if not critical to its future) part of the whole internet whereas in the early days it was most of it; hence the appearance of it being farther from the surface.

No need to reach for Tor, take HN whose volume is certainly much lower than those Facebook streams and various LOLcats, yet it is certainly pivotal to what's actually built on the internet. The next Facebook won't come from its users, it will come from one of you.

Human-Computer interaction as envisioned is at its peak. Dare you tell me that Second Life, World of Warcraft, or Eve Online are not quite akin to the metaverse that was envisioned in Snowcrash. Tell me that those robotic prosthetic limbs are not close to what you see in Gunnm (Battle Angel Alita in the US). All those eyes, ears, and even memory prosthetic devices (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6574) seen in Ghost in the Shell and Johnny Mnemonic are not dreamt of anymore, they are very real and useful to many (although admittedly they did not reach such levels of advancement, but that's a matter of time). Tell me those efforts to control and monitor everything including the internet "for the safety of everyone and his dog" are not dystopian in many ways, and get a look at how the third and fourth world are manipulating technology in ad-hoc, cheap, creative and dangerous ways to try and follow us in our first-world countries steps.

Of course there is some error correction to apply with regard to what was envisioned before all of that was even remotely possible; it is no wonder that fiction varies from reality.

Cyberpunk lives, for the best and the worst, today.

Post reply on HN