💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › magazines › UXU › uxu-238.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 15:06:53.

View Raw

More Information

-=-=-=-=-=-=-


                                ###     ###
                                 ###   ###
                      ###   ####  ### ###  ###   ####
                      ###    ###   #####   ###    ###
                      ###    ###    ###    ###    ###
                      ###    ###   #####   ###    ###
                      ##########  ### ###  ##########
                                 ###   ###
                                ###     ###

                         Underground eXperts United

                                 Presents...

         ####### ## ##      #######     # #   ####### ####### #######
         ##      ## ##      ##         #####       ## #    ## ##   ##
         ####    ## ##      ####        # #   #######   ####  #######
         ##      ## ##      ##         #####  ##      #    ## ##   ##
         ##      ## ####### #######     # #   ####### ####### #######

         [  The Internet Hysteria  ]                 [  By The GNN  ]


    ____________________________________________________________________
    ____________________________________________________________________


                           THE INTERNET HYSTERIA
                      by THE GNN/DualCrew-Shining/uXu


(Note:  This text is about a phenomena that is mainly concentrated to
Sweden.  However, non-swedes might find it interesting as a bizarre
anthropological study.)



   Internet is not a new invention, as we all know.  It was not constructed
yesterday.    But   during  nineteen  ninety-four,  more  people  connected
themselves  to  the net than ever before.  Prima facie, this is certainly a
pretty nice development in the digital culture.
   I  say  'prima  facie',  because  when  one looks a bit further into the
phenomena  one  discovers  several tragic details.  Some new members of the
net  have not connected themselves for the purpose of using it as it should
be  used.  Some besserwisser  people  need only around three seconds online
(some  people  does  not  even need that), before they immediately start to
make  up  new  rules  about  how  the  net  ought  to  work  (socially, not
technically of course).
   Then  there are the other newbies, those who listen to the above people.
Suddenly,  a  huge  amount  of  people  scream  for  censorship  and state
intervention.   Internet  cannot  be  stopped,  they  say,  but  it must be
controlled.   And  these  people  have  not been online for more than a few
moments - but still they burst out in such radical claims.
   Why is it so?  Let me offer you a few suggestions.

   I   recently  laid  my  hands  on  a  monthly  swedish  magazine  called
"Z.mag@zine",  and  there  was no question about the fact that the magazine
was  yet  another  desperate,  and embarrassing,  attempt to imitate Wired.
However, the magazine failed on several accounts with its little charade.
   Who  wants  to  read ten pages about some trendy celebrity that uses the
internet  for  sending  email  to  his  hip dudes in some other part of the
world?   Such  news might well work out in a magazine about gossip, but not
in one that indirectly claims to own the truth of the complete internet.  A
magazine  that  openly  has dedicated its contents to information about the
internet  ought  at  least  to have a staff that know what they are talking
about.   Z  Magazine  does not fulfil that important criterion.  Sometimes,
one wonders if they even have access to the net.
   Internet is a massive construction, and it is easy to become overwhelmed
when  you encounter it for the first time.  Unfortunately, some overwhelmed
individuals  (like  the editor of Z Magazine) believe that they immediately
understand  the importance of the net.  In their eyes, the main part of the
internet  is  some  World  Wide  Web  site where you are able to throw snow
balls, or chat with a sleeping cat.
   It is a shame that the newbies, when it comes to internet, should regard
these low-class magazines as the bible and the truth of the nets.  They are
no sources of information, they are sources of misinformation.
   Why?   Is  it  something  wrong  with that?  Could not people begin with
studying Z Magazine, and then move on to the real problems?
   They  could.   But  will they ever get so far if they are constantly fed
with  worthless  information  about  the  net?   One does not have to spend
several  years  on the net to realize that internet is more than snowballs.
It  is  a  net  of  positive  anarchy  and freedom.  A freedom that must be
protected.   If it  is  not  protected, Newspeech and Big Brother will gain
control.   Z  is not a healthy magazine for the internet.  It takes the net
down  to  a low level; a level where the net is just a fun hobby for people
with a modem - nothing more.

   The  whole  society  suffers  from  a  disease that could be called 'the
internet  hysteria'.  Some people wants to know everything about something,
but  fails since they know nothing about it - but they try to give everyone
else  the  expression that they know everything.  The ones who suffers from
this  hysteria can only describe the net in certain words, like 'cyberspace
for cyberpunks'.  It is only words, with no connection to what it is really
about.   The  whole  net-culture  is  declined  to a cool movement for cool
people, and that is for sure a sad sight.
   But  on the other hand there are also a few journalists and writers that
try  to  analyze  and  debate  the  internet  in  a more 'serious' fashion.
Tragically, even these people fail completely due to the fact that they are
more  interested  in exposing their pseudo-intellectual mind than trying to
understand  what  they  have  actually gone into.  To this date, there must
have  been  over  a dozen of articles in the daily press about the internet
culture from various writers, and not one of them have succeeded.  Instead,
the  articles  have  only made some people cry over the stupid contents and
puzzled others.
   And  in  television  talk-shows  one can enjoy the latest misinformation
about   the   internet,   presented  by  poets/police  men/singers/stand-up
comedians  and  other celebrities with three-second experiences of the net.
Their  'debates'  and  'views'  on  the  subject  are,  to  say  the least,
horrifying.   But  even if they are only able to produce bullshit, they are
invited  to  speak; they are 'trendy enough' to talk about this 'new trendy
movement' called 'cyberpunk on the trendy infobahn' or equal.

   The  circus  reminds  one of the golden days of '83, when the government
decided  that  the  whole swedish population should be educated in computer
technology.   Then,  however,  the  magic  word  was  'Vic-20',  now  it is
'Information  Technology'  and  'cyberspace'.   The mutual thing with these
movements  is  the  tragic  fact  that  the ones in charge for this 'global
education' have no clue about what they are really talking about.
   Back  in  1983,  the government decided that everyone should know how to
code  Basic.  Now, they want the population to know how to throw snow balls
on  WWW.   Is  that  really 'good' education?  Of course not.  It is just a
show made by, and presented to, amateurs.

   Everything   becomes  even   more  embarrassing   when  some   low-level
politicians  connect  themselves  to  the net.  Used to  their  Big Brother
position in  the  non-electronic  society, they immediately think that they
got the same power on the internet. 'Too much garbage','We need censorship'
and  'Someone  ought  to  CONTROL  the  net'  are  unfortunately very usual
comments from these quasi-surfers on the net.
   However,  one may laugh at these clowns, but they may very well turn out
to  become  a  threat  against  the  net.  Ordinary people whom yet have no
connection to the internet will listen to these misinformed individuals and
trust  their  opinions  as the holy truth.  With the mob on their side, the
electronic  politicians  may do whatever they feel to.  They cannot control
the  internet,  but they can call for 'moral cleaning' (i.e 'spread certain
information  that appeals to the party') - and that is for sure censorship,
but in a more delicate way.

       "How many fingers am I showing, Winston?"
       "Four."
       "And if the party says that it is not four
       fingers, but five - how many are there then?"

                          (Nineteen Eighty-Four)





    ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
            I know you really loved me, but my hands were tied.
       I have nothing to do. ETEXT.ARCHIVE.UMICH.EDU /pub/Zines/UXU
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

                       Personality goes a long way.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 uXu #238              Underground eXperts United 1995              uXu #238
                    Call CLU 'PUTERNET -> +1-515-232-7631
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------