💾 Archived View for mirrors.apple2.org.za › archive › ground.icaen.uiowa.edu › Collections › AOL › T… captured on 2024-12-18 at 01:13:50.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Online Perspectives
by Michael A. Banks
I've often wondered what might be the best way to explain
what being online is all about. How you approach it depends in
part on to whom you're speaking. It also depends on your own
perspective. I find the cultural perspective the most
interesting. And perhaps the most neglected, save for a few
get-over theses written by people from outside the community, as
it were.
That in mind, I've put together some basics on what it's
like to be online, and the online culture. I'm trying for a
broadband perspective, for newcomers and old hands. Whether
you're online or not, I hope you'll find this a bit
horizon-expanding. I offer some new facts, new facts, and a bit
of speculation ... a different perspective.
#
So, I've finished writing this intro to the online world,
and I'm still asking myself, how can I introduce the topic?
Give you a reading list? A step-by- step walkthrough? Blast out
with descriptions spiked with provocative metaphors? Hm ...
nope, none of the above. Let's try this:
"There's a place ... in my mind ...." So go the lines of an
old Beatles' tune. It's a tune that many modem users (aka
computer "networkers") might sing as they sign on to their
favorite online services, because they are indeed going to a
place in their mind--albeit a place that exists in part because
of and in/on computers. A place that exists as a true multi-
human/multi-machine interface.
Right. The human-machine interface is here. Now. It's not
waiting for scalp connects and nerve or brainwave inductance
devices, nor is it waiting for drug-enhancement. And it's not
waiting for you. While many people are imagining the virtual
world that the uninformed think cyberpunk writers "created," a
million or so people are doing it, living it--living online lives
that mirror or are distortions of their real-world existences (or
lives that are what they would like to be). As you read this,
gigabytes of information are quietly moving at near-lightspeed
via telephone lines and satellite downlinks. With the movement
of that information, worlds and personas are created and die by
the nano-second.
And the virtual world is virtually nothing like the seers
and science fiction writers and cultural predictionists tried to
tell you it would be. While public- or self-appointed gurus in
the aforementioned categories were carefully laying out the
online world, the people they thought they were writing about
picked up the tools and parts lying about and created real online
worlds, linking themselves in a global network that transcends
whatever you thought cyberpunk was, along with most of science
fiction.
To be sure, the media with which those of us online deal
with on a day-to-day basis are far less exotic than those
marvelous mind-links brought to you in fiction. Screw all that
intense poking around in single-vision futures, anyway, for what
is fiction but polished reality, pre-shaped to fit the needs of
plot and character and theme?
I'm talking clacking keyboards and computers and modems and
online services like GEnie, CompuServe, DELPHI, BIX, etc., and
computer BBSs that reside in someone's unused basement or bedroom
or den. I'm talking reality.
Besides, the destination is the point, and is Nepal any
less exotic if you fly there aboard a DC-3 rather than a 747?
Think about it.
It's real. It's here. It's now. And it's what this
article is about.
What I'm Doing Here
I'm here to talk about the worlds online--worlds to which
some of your, or your friends, are denied access. Which is too
bad, because most of you would enjoy being online, where you can
be and do virtually anything you wish. You can cruise for
software and data of all sorts, meet old friends and make new
ones, and the proverbial "much, much more."
Why me, rather than some famous "name" cultural hero or
whatever? Because I am literally and in all modesty the only
person who can write about this subject from this perspective.
I'm the only fiction and non-fiction writer I know of who is uses
as many online services as I do (hell, I'm the only person I know
of who is online in as many places as I am). I like this stuff.
I write books and columns and articles about it, and those works
are published in the U.S., Japan, Argentina, and the U.K. (In
Japan, I'm a "famous American networker and SF author" to Yomiuri
Shimbun's 9 million readers, and to readers of various
magazines.) I include it in my fiction. And all else like that.
(If this indicates something of an ego, well, having an ego is a
pre-requisite for getting published. Not that you need an
overinflated, abrasive ego like some writers of my acquaintance.
But you gotta have an ego, to be able to present youself, and
this is the only one I have. What you see is what you get.)
Where is this going? In the direction of strangeness and
facts and oddities and whatever else comes to mind, ever-mindful
that you are reading this, so I'll work to avoid overindulging in
games of style and technique, hewing to my subject as much as I
can. Be warned, though: I'll drop in random blocks of commentary
and facts at times, because when I'm writing about this stuff my
viewpoint tends to change shape from moment to moment, just
because online worlds are that way. Which is no less than
appropriate, so pardon my skewed-ness.
Since this is the first time out, I'm going to try to give
you an introduction to and a "feel" for what's online and what's
done with it. First, for those of you who aren't online, or who
have limited online experience, here's a taste of the
strangeness:
#
My modem brings strange people and events into my home.
No, I mean really strange, like you could write a million
genre-fiction stories about it. Better than The Naked City
and The Twilight Zone and Vernor Vinge's True Names all
rolled into one. (Oh, add True Names to the reading list
I'm not giving you.) Far better, because my modem links me
to my choice of a bizarro group of worlds beyond the world
we physically inhabit--and the access is under my control.
I flick through them with almost the same ease as I flick
through cable-TV channels, running realtime and multi-level
interactive.
These worlds are created almost without limitations by
those who inhabit them. Created on computer bulletin boards
and online services (networks, to some of you).
Consider ... in a given week, I might communicate
online with pleasant Japanese editors and irate British
writers and journalists seeking quotes and avowed
transsexuals and rock singers and 60s TV sitcom stars and a
West German computer consultant who's willing to spend
twenty minutes of international telecom money figuring out
what a palindrome is, and a Japanese translator who's
equally willing, but never does figure it out (he did come
back to get the lowdown on puns); or horny people cruising
live-prose accompaniment for masturbation; or Dead-heads and
wigged-out role-playing gamers and microcosmic power-
trippers and general jerks; or jokers and hackers and voices
of reason and maybe even you.
Via electronic mail and realtime chatting, on sixteen
online services with twenty-odd IDs, I daily flow in and out
of virtual worlds created by people who have one thing in
common: they have access to something you don't. Endless
virtual worlds offering endless information resources. And
some of them have discovered that the power to create worlds
in metaphor and sometimes fact is real.
It's interesting, it's fun, it's entertaining, it's
absurd, and sometimes it's profitable--as is the case with
anything put together by people with almost no guidelines.
#
Some might be tempted to say being online is participating
in a work of art, but that would be bulls*** (and it will
continue to be bulls*** when being online is "discovered" by the
next Andy Warhol crowd); being online is grabbing and giving and
sharing hard information and idle chatter and gossip and intense
ideas.
There are similes and metaphors galore for "the online
experience," but I'll skip those for now, because the none of
them are right on. Skip all the flash-hip glitz cyberpunk that's
been zoomed at you, too, and all that silly Frankenstein stuff
from the old-line science fiction writers. None of that's going
to happen.
(A note for intense science fiction readers: most modem the
users don't read a lot of SF, so if you're an SF reader don't
look for people talking about "jacking in," and don't look for
them to recognize the reference if you sign on to a system and
tag the realtime conferences "anarchy parks," however appropriate
that may be.)
Likewise, skip the "information utility" and "communications
medium" and "data resource" stuff laid out in the promo for
commercial online services. Despite the fact that someone else
owns the hardware and software that make online worlds possible,
and have laid out careful designs for those worlds, it is the
users who shape those worlds. Why and how? Because those worlds
exist in and depend on the interaction of the minds of thousands
of modem users. (No--don't hand me any "group mind" concepts;
put that stuff over in the corner, in the pile with channeling
and crystals. Or, get a modem and find someone who wants to play
the game.)
In sum, being online is a 48-hour day communications and
information freak out and pig out and party, depending on who you
are. And you're invited. (If you want to find out how to
R.S.V.P. that invitation and get online, see the accompanying
sidebar. And the time dimension really does include a 48-hour
day; consider Tokyo, 12 hours or more in your future ....)
What are They Doing There? (Or, Why are They Online?)
Beyond the strangeness I rolled out a few paragraphs back,
you may well wonder exactly what are people are doing online, or
why. Or maybe not. But I'll tell you anyway; anything that
people pay lots of money to do begs explaining. (But it's all
strange, depending on the context.)
Modem users find all sorts of applications for being online.
Friends separated by hundreds or thousands of physical miles can
communicate faster and at less cost than via conventional
communications media. Agorophobics can mingle and be vivacious.
Nervous investors can check and recheck and calculate and have
decisions made for them.
What else? You can play formal games, alone or with others.
You can play informal games (like adopting a persona and seeing
how many people you can fool with it, as a substitute for not
being the person you want to be in real life). You can stumble
into some of the most amazing conversations (14 gay males
comparing length, for instance, or half a dozen role-
players bellying up to a virtual bar in a neo-Medieval inn, or an
anonymous male teenager chatting about sex with a self-labeled
feminist female schoolteacher who invariably terminates such
chats by typing "Ohgodohgodohgod ..." until the screen is full.
You may imagine the reason for this.
So much for the sensationalistic. Modem users also use the
online services and BBSs to get software (pirated or not),
conduct business (buy, sell, or deliver products), get news and
do research. And, for some of us, being online constitutes a big
slice of our social life.
The networks provide a venue for experimentation, too. For
instance, I'm collecting a lot of interesting data with a
simulacrum I created. It signs on to an online service, finds a
realtime conference, and talks. And yes, it's interactive.
Artificial Intelligence? I don't know; perhaps it would be
better tagged as Intelligence Implementation. Chat with me
online some night, and see if you can tell whether it's me or the
simulacrum ....
A Few Words Concerning Elitism
As you've probably figured out, being online can be as
useful as being able to read or drive a car, depending on your
lifestyle, profession, and interests. Until recently, the
majority of people who could benefit from being online were
barred from access, because online worlds were largely restricted
to the techno-elite. But now all you have to be is techno-aware;
hardware and software have become less user-belligerent, and
basically if you are aware that the resources are there, you can
use them. Still, the majority of the world cannot relate to
being online the way they can relate to, say, VCRs or pizzas.
Thus the techno-elite who used to make up most of the online
population have been diluted with an influx of what you might
call a sort of "plug-n-go" elite. You no longer have to know a
lot to access online worlds; just get the equipment, introduce
yourself to those aspects of the world you want to use, and
that's it.
(To borrow an overused simile, it's as if the explorers and
frontier-expanding types have finished marking the trails and
identifying and clearing out the dangers, and now the settlers,
who have intentions other than exploring--like shaping the land
and bending it to their will--have moved in.)
There's another group of elitists that separates the public
at large from those online, and is the main reason that computer
communication is not fully "legitimized" (like, say VCRs or
pizzas). That group consists of the economically elite--and let
me hasten to add that they are not an elite group by choice, in
case that's not obvious. Those who cannot afford the money for
the equipment to get online (anywhere from five hundred bucks for
used equipment, to three grand or more for an upscale computer
system and V.42/MNP error-checking 9600-bps modem with online
help, power steering, A/C, 21 jewels and all the other options),
and/or cannot afford the time to become aware of all this stuff
and learn about it, well, those people are cut out.
Thus, while the online worlds are no longer restricted to
the techno-elite, they are restricted to another kind of elite,
in terms of financial resources and/or personal background.
Note that, in aggregate, this is true only in the U.S. In
Japan and Europe and third-world countries, they're either living
in the past (like in Japan or the U.K., where it's still 1985
online) or clamping on to American culture (as is the case in
certain South American countries). So elsewhere, it costs even
more to be online, and there's a higher techno-awareness
required. In some cases, the techies still rule, and in others
being online is almost a covert operation (consider the Soviet
Union, or African nations).
Who's Out There?
Hopefully, I've not given you too distorted a picture of who
is online. After all not everyone online (nor even a majority)
assumes alternate personas. You'll find people like the woman up
the street from you, who you didn't even know owned a computer,
online. You'll find writers online, in need of an excuse not to
write or carrying on business with editors. Writers who don't
mind talking with their fans are online, too--like Tom Clancy,
who hangs out on GEnie, or Jerry Pournelle, or George Alec
Effinger (who writes about this stuff anyway), or Douglas Adams.
Bored night-shift workers dialing out of factories, grocery
stores, and warehouses are not uncommon. (People who are flat-
out bored for any reason are not uncommon.)
Singers and performers and actors are online, too. Who?
Lots of names you'd recognize, but many traveling incognito.
Let's see ... B.J. Thomas, called realtime conferencing "the
interview wave of the future"; several soap opera stars, who log
on between rehearsals and takes; Martha Quinn of MTV fame (though
she's kinda busy now); someone who may or may not be Peter Falk;
maybe Carlos Santana or Patti Scialfia or Pete Townshend or John
Poindexter; maybe lots of other people you'd never expect to meet
anywhere outside of the world's "hip" cities.
Lots of computer techies, of course; they've made room for
the plug-n-go crowd, but they haven't given up their turf. Lots
of special-interest people, too--people who share hobby or
professional or personal interests.
All of which not only tells you a bit of who's online
(pretty much a cross-section of the American middle and upper
class), but also a bit more about why they're online. 'Nuff
said.
#
So much for the basic intro. Between the foregoing and the
sidebar, and what's coming up, you'll know your way around the
online world fairly well soon enough.
#
"And Now, the News"
What the Wall Street Journal Didn't Tell You About the 'Quake of 89
Perhaps I should have used this header: "How the News Media
Prevented Black Tuesday on Wall Street without Even Trying (or
Knowing)." Put it up there yourself if you like; either header
applies.
Anyway, if you're into conspiracies and paranoia, you'll
probably enjoy this. Picture this: It's October 19, 1989, and I
get a call from guy named Tom Curry at Time magazine; he'd been
online asking for info on the central California earthquake that
involved computer networks and I agreed to give him some info.
The same day, I get a call from the Associated Press to be
interviewed on the same subject. On October 20, I'm asked by a
writer friend to phone Mr. So-and-so at the Wall Street Journal
about the subject.
So I tell Time and the AP and the Wall Street Journal about
how the San Francisco area is data-relay central between the
Pacific Rim and the U.S. mainland and points between. I further
explain how RCA, the record carrier that moves data to and from
the Pacific Rim for major American packet-switching networks,
lost its satellite link, and how the domestic networks' equipment
went down anyway (thanks to equipment that was vulnerable because
of poor power-backup and lack of alternate link provisions). A
little more about how the technicians engineers at the packet-
switching networks had a particularly interesting priority: get
the financial data-links up first thing. I also tell them that
this meant money-heads throughout the U.S. (and elsewhere) were
trading their pieces of paper based on totally outdated
information.
So, what happened? Why didn't you hear about all this?
Well, the Time story was killed. The AP never called back to
complete their "interview," and the Wall Street Journal staffers
with whom I spoke carefully explained that I wasn't a writer (as
if I hadn't published three million words, and edited a few
hundred thousand more), and therefore couldn't provide them with
any useful information.
The sum total of information having to do with computer
communications and the San Francisco earthquake provided to the
public was:
* A front-page article in the Wall Street Journal concerning
mainly local emergency communications on a relatively tiny
multi-user system in the area hit by the 'quake (written
by a guy who was on retainer by WSJ).
* A few mentions of same in the computer press.
* A few bits here and there about the emergency
communications network that sprung up, controlled by the
people who could, for reasons involving which online
services' private packet-switching networks had reliable
power backups and immediate microwave links rather than
landlines. (Imagine that--for the first time, emergency
communications in a disaster area the hands of mostly
average people. Lots of amateur radio operators' stations
were "down," and voice telephone was all but impossible,
but those with telecom capability could get out--many
relying on battery-powered computers and modems.) Most of
these were the results of fast-acting network publicity
people.
That was almost it. There were a few stories about
automatic teller machines (ATMs) being turned off, since they
were updating with out-of-date information, and about a couple of
relatively brave banks turning theirs back on and trusting the
honesty of the people who needed to get cash from ATMs.
Having been involved in relaying messages and information
among several networks on behalf of the Science Fiction Writers
of America (and, less formally, for the SF community in general),
I was online quite a bit in the hours and days following the
earthquake, and I learned quite a bit, formally and informally,
publicly and privately, some of it being information of the "you
didn't hear it here" variety. So I wrote an article about the
combination telephone/computer communications emergency network
that got word into and out of the disaster area and about the
financial crash for Japan's largest telecom magazine Networking.
And I mentioned a bit of this (though not the part about the
financial network being down and out) in a column I do for a
magazine called Computer Shopper.
The Japanese recognized the importance of the story, of the
facts concerning the financial networks (of course, the Japanese
were acutely aware of the lack of data communications). Asahi
Shimbun, Japan's second-largest daily newspaper, picked up the
story, and I'm still getting fan letters.
On this side of the Pacific, though, the facts were
suppressed or ignored.
Why? Was there a conspiracy? Hm. Well, I have my own
ideas on that, which I'll get to presently. But first, some
background ...
You may well wonder why San Francisco is so important to
East-West finance. It's like this: you got your Bank of Hong
Kong and Bank of America and Bank of this and that there, and a
heavy concentration of Japanese and Japanese-Americans there (in
Tokyo alone, KDD phone company was going nuts trying to handle
60,000 attempted calls to San Francisco per hour, for hours after
the 'quake). But, rather than leave it to you to infer what's
what, here's a basic fact: San Francisco is the financial gateway
to the Pacific Rim, physically, on paper, literally, and, in the
computer sense of the word, virtually.
The bottom line: almost all commercial telecommunications
with the entire Pacific Rim were lost due to the knockout punch
the earthquake delivered to satellite ground stations, telephone
switching stations, power lines. (All of this information is
straight from those who were in the trenches; from the techs
working to get things up and running again, among others.)
So the money-heads went on trading and making and losing
ghost money, blissfully unaware that they were cut off from the
right now! information they needed. And <smirk>, the economic
advisors and analyst types were likewise cut off--and didn't know
it. (For the economic advisors and economists, being cut off
from information is not unusual; take look at how they justify
their predictions sometime. Too many of 'em are regarded as such
bona-fide seers that their predictions become self-fulfilling,
which more often than not screws up the economy royally. The
predictions are bulls**t: for the majority plying that trade, the
"bottom line" is making a name and money by making those self-
fulfilling predictions.
(But this is a topic for elsewhere. Still, it's worth
noting that we now have a little hard evidence about the economic
predictions; they come out the same with or without accurate
information. Bottom line--since we're talking money I'll over-
use that cliched phrase: these people don't know what they're
doing.
(There. I've taken my shots. Now, back to the main track.)
"So what?" you say. "So these business types didn't have
up-to-the minute info on Asian corporate activities, stock
prices, money values, and the like. So what?"
Okay, look at this: the money-heads were trading as if
nothing had happened but an earthquake with mainly regional
effects. But what if they had known that the info wasn't coming
in from the Pacific Rim? What if they had known that what they
were doing was based on the wrong information?
The answer's not obvious until you think about it: they
would have, as a Wall Street acquaintance put it, freaked. They
would have absolutely freaked out! And how many points would the
Dow-Jones Average have dropped? 100? 300? 500? It would have
been interesting to find out. But it didn't happen. Why?
Because the news of the data-link loss didn't get out.
And why didn't it get out? Well, it would be nice to
imagine that it was intentionally suppressed because someone "in
power" was aware of the damage that the fictions of stocks and
commodities and money markets do to our society. Conspiracy fans
will, of course, believe that the information was suppressed
because "behind the scenes" types wanted it suppressed, for
whatever reasons. But it wasn't suppressed as a part of some
power group's hidden agenda. (Blame it on the Illuminati or the
Rockefellers if you wish; I don't take stock in such
speculations.)
No, it was none of that. This potentially panic-generating
information was suppressed by simple air-headedness and ego-
tripping, because it came from the "wrong" sources, and because
the news types couldn't understand it. And I'll note that I
wasn't the only such "wrong" source.
In other words, the facts didn't get out because the people
who decide what's news didn't hear them via their legitimate
sources, and being unable to comprehend the facts, ignored them.
(Normally, each news decision-maker uses her or his own power
trip or personal political agenda or sensationalism rating to
determine what's news, but if they don't understand it, it takes
too long to figure it out, and there's no blood, it ain't news.
No conspiracies here, either; just a lot of small- and big-time
would-be conspiracies. End of shot.)
Side note: all of this says a lot and implies more about the
importance of data communications to the existence of our
society.
Final note: if you doubt the importance of the financial
information flow just cited, remember the fact that the number
one priority of the data carrier networks was to bring the
financial elements of the Pacific Rim data net back online.
Everything else was ignored until financial data communication
was back in place. Hell, the packet-switching networks didn't
even bother to bring Hawaii back up until 22 hours after the
'quake hit.
So What Else is New?
Speaking of significant items that didn't make "the news,"
the first-ever computer BBS in the Soviet Union went online at
the end of 1989. This is a landmark event, because BBSs were all
but unheard of in the Soviet Union until this BBS opened.
The board, called Eesti BBS #1, is in Tallinn, Estonia.
International links are via Helsinki. The multi-user system is
set up for messaging and file transfer, and is intended to
function as a open communications channel to Soviet and non-
Soviet countries.
The system is set up on a PC with 40 megs of storage and a
300/1200-bps modem that recognizes both international (CCITT) and
American (Bell) standards. If you want to give it a try, the
number is +7 0142 422 583 ("+7" is Finland's country code from
the U.S.). You may have to wait up to two minutes for a carrier,
depending on the phone routing from the U.S. to Finland. You may
also have to delay the dialing speed, to compensate for delays
caused by the number of phone exchanges through which the call is
routed. Evening hours are the best time to dial up the system--
try for a time slot when you're hitting evening/nighttime hours
in your corner of the world as well as in Estonia.
#
Michael A. Banks is the author of 21 published non-fiction
books and science fiction novels (including the definitive work
on personal computer communications, The Modem Reference,
published by Brady Books/Simon & Schuster). He's also published
more than 1,000 magazine articles and short stories, lively
technical documents, and "... a few catchy slogans."
He can be found online "almost anywhere," but if you want to
reach him fast, try E-mail to KZIN on DELPHI, to MIKE.BANKS on
GEnie, to BANKS2 on AOL, or to mike_banks on BIX.
#
BOOKS BY MICHAEL A. BANKS
"If a technical thing is troubling you, just wait a bit.
Michael Banks is probably writing a book that will make it
clear." --The Associated Press
Do you use DeskMate 3? Are you getting the most out of the
program? To find out, get a copy of GETTING THE MOST OUT OF
DESKMATE 3, by Michael A. Banks, published by
Brady Books/Simon & Schuster, and available in your local
Tandy/Radio Shack or Waldenbooks store now. Or, phone 800-624-
0023 to order direct. (The all-new 2nd edition is now
available!)
"GETTING THE MOST OUT OF DESKMATE 3 is more than a guide to
DeskMate; it's an enhancement..."--Waldenbooks Computer
NewsLink
Interested in modem communications? Check out THE MODEM
REFERENCE, also by Michael A. Banks and published by Brady
Books/Simon & Schuster. Recommended by Jerry Pournelle in Byte,
The New York times, The Smithsonian Magazine, various computer
magazines, etc. (Excerpts from this book accompany this file.)
THE MODEM REFERENCE is available at your local B. Dalton's,
Waldenbooks, or other bookstore, either in stock or by order.
Or, phone 800-624-0023 to order direct. (1st edition currently
available; all-new 2nd edition available in January, 1991!)
"I definitely recommend it." --Jerry Pournelle, BYTE Magazine
Want the lowdown on getting more out of your word processor?
Read the only book on word processing written by writers, for
writers: WORD PROCESSING SECRETS FOR WRITERS, by Michael A. Banks
& Ansen Dibel (Writer's Digest Books). WORD PROCESSING SECRETS
FOR WRITERS is available at your local B. Dalton's, Waldenbooks,
or other bookstore, either in stock or by order. Or, phone 800-
543-4644 (800-551-0884 in Ohio) to order direct.
Other books by Michael A. Banks
UNDERSTANDING FAX & E-MAIL (Howard W. Sams & Co.)
THE ODYSSEUS SOLUTION (w/Dean Lambe; SF novel; Baen Books)
JOE MAUSER: MERCENARY FROM TOMORROW (w/Mack Reynolds; SF novel; Baen Books)
SWEET DREAMS, SWEET PRICES (w/Mack Reynolds; SF novel; Baen Books)
COUNTDOWN: THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO MODEL ROCKETRY (TAB Books)
THE ROCKET BOOK (w/Robert Cannon; Prentice Hall Press)
SECOND STAGE: ADVANCED MODEL ROCKETRY (Kalmbach Books)
For more information, contact:
Michael A. Banks
P.O. Box 312
Milford, OH 45150