Live data from Hacker News

Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

mbh4h.substack.com

371–380 of 427 posts

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#371

My favourite lesser known post-Neuromancer works: George Alec Effinger "When Gravity Fails" (1987) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Gravity_Fails Walter John Williams "Aristoi" (1992) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristoi_(novel) And just pre-Gibson: Michael Berlyn "The Integrated Man" (1980) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2144056.The_Integrated_M... Bruce Sterling "The Artificial Kid" (1980) This is not a hac…

Thank you so much! Neuromancer had such a profound impact on my career and my life. I've been searching for similar works for years and by this point, I've read all the obvious ones twice over.

Dreams of Flesh and Sand by William T. Quick reads like a rip-off of Neuromancer ... and it should be bad ... but I really like the writing style and the characterisation -- Berg, Toshi and Calley seem pretty cool and real, and so it may be a rip-off, but it feels like a fun and interesting rip-off. Worth a look.

Void Star by Zachery Mason is also good.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greg Eagan’s SF is so hard it makes ‘hard’ SF feel like soap bubbles.

That guy goes as hard as a math class. For example, here's a page on his site explaining a concept in one of his books: https://www.gregegan.net/DIASPORA/02/02.html

His explanation of time dilation and different types of space-time geometry is far more accessible than any other I’ve seen.

https://www.gregegan.net/ORTHOGONAL/00/PM.html

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The heavily technical stuff is the reason that hard sci fi isn’t popular. Technically-minded people, even if they don’t get the specifics, are comfortable enough with technical stuff that it’s essentially decoration, and can probably intuit some things out if it through context. But non-technical people can’t just ignore what looks like a frustratingly opaque wall of gibberish, not realizing if any of it is crucial f…

Hard sci-fi can definitely be popular, The Martian and The Three-Body Problem are two examples I can immediately think of. I think the Arrival and Contact movies would also count (not sure if the books were considered popular before their film adaptations came out). There is usually a way to avoid most of the "opaque wall of gibberish" so that there is just enough for a technical-minded reader to tell that the author…

Ah yes, the hard sci-fi staples such as riding to orbit on a crotch rocket and contributing to dimensional potluck at the end of time.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russian culture considers translated (I think) Shakespeare to surpass the original. We Israelis also had one of our more famous poets (Alterman) translate some Shakespeare but I'm not aware of the translation being considered a masterpiece on its own (personally it felt too archaic to appreciate). We have two translations of Lord of the Rings (Tolkien fans being one of the more picky bunches of book geeks here, I'll…

I only read Shakespeare in the original Klingon

I recall getting that book...

One of the challenges with Khamlet is that Klingon originally had no state of being verb - it was part of the word itself rather than a bare "I am {something}". Thus "to be or not to be" was never something that was translatable in the original Klingon language and it had to be updated.

Glancing at Amazon, there appears to be a release of Sunzi's Art of War from 2018.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#375
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can find the project here: https://github.com/dmf-archive It sounds like you're trying to build the Cyberpunk equivalent of the shared semi-hard-SF Orion's Arm universe / world building project? - https://www.orionsarm.com/ - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion's_Arm

I prefer to call it, the sociology unit test. https://github.com/dmf-archive/IPWT https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15676304 https://github.com/dmf-archive/Tiny-ONN Let's make sci-fi into reality.

Okay, I'll bite: what's so "terrifying" about developing a physical theory of consciousness?

I have to admit having similar reactions to other "profound" questions - for example, does free will exist? To that one I say: As long as weather exists, even deterministic intelligences will be as unpredictable as one with free will. A machine with chaotic inputs will itself be sufficiently chaotic.

Regarding consciousness, I think there is a category error born of (understandable) hubris. It is the conceit that you can carve out "consciousness" from the holistic physical phenomena of "humans" or, more generally, "life". It's kind of a package deal. Humans might (and probably will) make concious machines, but it will forever be an unanswerable philosophical question about whether they "really" are, just as it is with other humans. In the end it's best to "zoom out" and consider the subject in the context of the Fermi paradox - will such an invention help or harm humanity? (Does replacement imply harm? If we are replaced by our children, is that harm?)

In any event, it's all above my pay-grade, so to speak. For what it's worth, I tend to think that a) life is common in the universe, b) intelligent life very uncommon, and c) humanity got some really serious help from the cosmos/won a few lotteries. We got a moon the exact same angular size as the sun, allowing us to e.g. verify general relativity with ease. We got an atmosphere that let us see the stars clearly, and still breathe. We got a 3rd gen star and planet with a nice mix of light and heavy elements, and plenty of energy runway in the sun. We got abiogenesis (~common) and eukaryotic cells (~uncommon). We got some timely 99% extinctions (but not 100%) to clear the path for us, and which coincidentally left vast energy resources underground for us to bootstrap out of the middle ages. We got a celestial moat, almost impossible to cross (special relativity speed limits; thermodynamic limits) for all but the most advanced (and therefore presumably wisest) civilizations, keeping us safe from colonization. The latter is a bit of a golden cage, and I consider getting out of that cage the highest civilizational goal possible.

Within this picture, AI can fit in in many places, with positive and negative effects. I have to admit that I do not like the trend I see in humanity to become unmoored from the physical world, to venture out unarmed with critical thinking skills, like lambs to the slaughter in the barbaric free-for-all that is the modern info-sphere, who's ulimtate goals are the same as they ever were: money and power. The chance of a stupid self-own like nuclear war, autonomous AI weapons, bio-warfare, or catastrophic global climate change are still all too likely, and getting more likely as intelligent, balanced minds are selected against. We can't do anything about a caldera explosion or a nearby supernova, or even being stuck in-system while the sun burns out, but we can and should avoid shooting ourselves while playing with daddy's gun.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#376
post #80
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cyberpunk was essentially a sub-type of counterculture, and counterculture itself has pretty much been dead for a couple decades now. When the hackers are primarily interested in VC funds, the cryptocurrency ethos overtaken by the finance industry, and the goal of every artist to “make it” as a creator, there’s basically no room for culture that explicitly wants to operate outside the system. Counter-culture still…

Which is one reason I think novels like Neuromancer and count zero and Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World, feel so dated today, is that they are so decidedly not-queer in their sexual dynamics.

Agreed, but lol at the center-right hacker news populace ever accepting such a philosophy.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#377

One thing that I found remarkable about Gibson is how a-technical he was at the time: "When I wrote Neuromancer, I didn't know that computers had disc drives. Until last Christmas, I'd never had a computer; I couldn't afford one. When people started talking about them, I'd go to sleep. Then I went out and bought an Apple II on sale, took it home, set it up, and it started making this horrible sound like a farting toa…

I find that very believable, since Neuromancer isn't at all about computers. The computers involved are little different from what you might have seen on Star Trek. They are story engines -- except for the ones that are really just people. This is not a negative. Sci fi is always about people.

Alas. I would love a story with utterly alien paradigm but nobody can actually write them and neither will the artificial minds anxiously crafted in the image of human mind be able to.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean idk when you read it, but like the author said I've seen this language be absorbed so I can't take it in as fresh innovative stuff. I was born after the novel came out so obviously was decades old when I read it.

I did read both when they came out (in paperback anyway). But I know what you mean. Friends who had not read The Lord of the Rings but saw the films can be excused for thinking the story was "derivative".

The old "Seinfeld isn't funny" one on tvtropes.

I find it's easier to get in a time period with visuals compared to a book, but it is a forgivable thing for later generations to 'not get' either way. I certainly don't know all the musicians who influenced the musicians that influenced me.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And communism By a literal definition communism means the collective ownership of the means of production. In the Culture the means of production own themselves, and they don’t seem to answer to anyone unless it suits them.

Socialism is the transition stage where collective ownership of the means of production, where the working class gains state power from the capitalist class. Communism is a later stage of such abundance that money, classes and state power become redundant and are abolished. The Culture is an imagining of the latter, where many means of production become people. They thus become workers that can labour for each other…

My reading of the Culture novels is that few people produce anything at all, or do any work or labour, and nearly every is produced by the ships, orbitals, and the Minds that control them. It’s not clear who exactly decides what gets produced, but decision making seems to be largely controlled by the Minds.

Re: Reading Neuromancer for the first time in 2025

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socialism is the transition stage where collective ownership of the means of production, where the working class gains state power from the capitalist class. Communism is a later stage of such abundance that money, classes and state power become redundant and are abolished. The Culture is an imagining of the latter, where many means of production become people. They thus become workers that can labour for each other…

My reading of the Culture novels is that few people produce anything at all, or do any work or labour, and nearly every is produced by the ships, orbitals, and the Minds that control them. It’s not clear who exactly decides what gets produced, but decision making seems to be largely controlled by the Minds.

The Minds are people too. Production happens individually at the small scale and based on collective decisions at the large scale. The Minds sway public opinion, but ultimately the public at large makes large decisions like the Idiran war.
Post reply on HN