Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

William Gibson's AGRIPPA Recovered and Revealed

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the gripping-hand dept.

Sci-Fi 98

Bud Cook writes "While the text of William Gibson's elusive electronic poem AGRIPPA is widely posted around the Web, it has not been seen in its original incarnation — custom-built software designed to scroll the poem through a single play before encrypting each line with an RSA algorithm — since 1992. Today is the 16th anniversary, to the day, of the poem's initial release. A team of scholars at the University of Maryland and UC Santa Barbara used forensic computing to restore the code from an original diskette loaned by a collector and have placed video of the complete 'run,' as well as never-before-seen footage from the night of AGRIPPA's public debut in 1992, up on a Web site called the Agrippa Files. There's also a detailed essay documenting the forensic process, plus a mess of stills, screenshots, and a copy of the disk image itself."

cancel ×

98 comments

Harold AI? (4, Insightful)

PakProtector (115173) | more than 5 years ago | (#26058935)

We finally found the Epitaph of the Twilight?!

Epic poem (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26058953)

A while ago, while browsing around William Gibson's epic poem, I had to take the piss. Niggers love my big sphinx of quartz.

Could this be.. (5, Funny)

contra_mundi (1362297) | more than 5 years ago | (#26058959)

Could this be the first DRM? It's much more draconian than the 3 activations and buy a new game from EA.

Re:Could this be.. (4, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059293)

It's much more draconian than the 3 activations and buy a new game from EA.

And apparently just as ineffective.

Re:Could this be.. (2, Insightful)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059569)

And apparently just as ineffective.

Considering it took 16 years for it to become widely available in its original form, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that ineffective.

Re:Could this be.. (3, Insightful)

Lisandro (799651) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060027)

Considering it took 16 years for it to become widely available in its original form, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that ineffective.

Maybe it's just no one cared too much about it...

Re:Could this be.. (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061519)

Considering it took 16 years for it to become widely available in its original form, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that ineffective.

But considering the better-than-original no-obnoxious-copy-protection-whatsoever edition was published in no time flat and everyone was happy with it all these years, I would guess that people who want the "original form" are in minority... =)

As it often happens, life imitates art, huh?

Re:Could this be.. (1)

STrinity (723872) | more than 5 years ago | (#26065403)

Somebody obviously never played pirated computer games in the '80s. The "cracker" who had defeated the copy protection on the original software would add a splash screen with his name when he distributed the game. Similarly (although perhaps not strictly digitally), you couldn't just hook two VCRs together and copy a film you rented at Blockbuster onto a blank tape.

Re:Could this be.. (1)

awright69 (821812) | more than 5 years ago | (#26074359)

Let me introduce you to the 733T nibble-mode VCR pair I hacked together in the 80s..... Helical scan-signal direct copying! State of the art - copied MV right along with control and audio track information..... 100% source-compatible!

Wait, it's here in my garage SOMEwhere!

Ahhh, the heady days of the 80s...

In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (5, Insightful)

The Ultimate Fartkno (756456) | more than 5 years ago | (#26058969)

...it's quite heartbreaking to see a work that intentionally removed itself from your grasp. It's quite the change from people who expect immortality simply for having cameras pointed at them or semi-literate fiction aimed at people who think MTV is the height of culture.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (0, Offtopic)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059213)

Worse it was stored very poorly:

>>>UC Santa Barbara used forensic computing to restore the code from an original diskette

This is why you should always print your source code to PAPER for backup. Diskettes lose their magnetism, and CDs fade, but paper can last 3000 years even if buried underground (Dead Sea Scrolls). Retyping everything from the paper is a chore, but still preferable to permanent loss.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (4, Informative)

Splab (574204) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059289)

Except the dead sea scrolls is hide from animals, not paper from your printer. Normal printing paper has a very short life span (comparatively).

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (0, Offtopic)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060097)

Hmmm. So how long is a paper's lifespan?

I have Bibles from my family that are over a hundred years old. They are still in very good shape. I wouldn't be surprised if they were still readable at age 1000. Replace "Bible" with "source code" and I could easily imagine someone trying one of my ancient programs in the year 2900..... by which point the original disks would have long been erased.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (2, Insightful)

xouumalperxe (815707) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060451)

Modern mass produced paper is comparatively low quality and has a much higher acid content than older paper, thus aging much, much worse, to the point where early 20th century books are much worse off than much older ones (I assume modern high-end paper has better durability than that though, and old paper is, by definition, the high-end stuff because that's all there was). Not sure how the printer ink itself ages.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

berend botje (1401731) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061549)

Don't forget that the only old books you see are the ones that survived. There are countless others that were destroyed by any number of means.

I have a few books from the seventies that are as new, and a few pockets that are at most five years old that are yellow and crumbly.

Quality paper lasts longer than cheap paper. Well, colour me surprised.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26062509)

Quality paper lasts longer than cheap paper. Well, colour me surprised.

Should we use cheap inks that will quickly fade, or something more durable?

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (2, Informative)

iocat (572367) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060495)

Use an inkjet for those prinouts! -- Ink on paper, good. Toner on paper, not so good -- it loses its grip after just a few dozen years. A lot depends on the paper too. I have pulp magazines and books that I have compared to AGRiPPA simply because as you turn the pages they basically disintigrate.

As for AGRiPPA itself, I get the point, but it always struck me as Gibson's shark jumping moment. An extremely unegalitarian artwork that only a few people can see in its intended form is certainly the artist's right to create, but it really lessened my respect for him, and decreased my interest in his future output.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063051)

Only if the ink doesn't just fade away. Older inkjets were notorious for this. One year of use and the print was basically gone.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (0, Offtopic)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26064187)

Those sound like thermal jets. They don't use actual ink, but just apply heat to a thermal-sensitive paper. Lay a hot pizza on that paper and it will turn black!

A true inkjet "squirts" ink on a page which then absorbs the ink like a sponge. That type of printing will last very long..... perhaps not as long as the old impact printers, but still longer than any of us will survive. I recently found my old 8th grade science notes which were printed over 20 years ago and are still the original white color (except on the edges).

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

iocat (572367) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066847)

Actually some old inks would fade, but these days they are much more permanent. Thermal printers that used thermal paper fade quickly, but thermal printers that used wax-based ribbons last a long time. I too have old fanzines I made 20+ years ago that I made with my Apple Scribe wax/thermal printer that still look perfect. -Chris

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063027)

Family Bibles are printed on PH neutral lignin-free paper and sometimes there is a coating on the edges to keep out dust and chemicals.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | more than 5 years ago | (#26065619)

Replace "Bible" with "source code" and I could easily imagine someone trying one of my ancient programs in the year 2900..... by which point the original disks would have long been erased.

I hope they use MLX [wikipedia.org] to aid in typing them in, mistake free.

Quality paper (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066445)

Most printer paper these days is essentially throwaway stuff, like much of the rest of our society.

Archival paper is special. Not only is it acid-free, but it is made with a base reserve of alkaline to resist later exposure to acid in the environment. It also has a different composition, most notably low amounts of lignin (from wood pulp). Basic stuff should last 100 years, good stuff maybe 500 years, the best maybe 1,000.

I bet your Bible is yellowed and the paper is slightly brittle. I have one like that. That's the acid in the paper causing the brittleness and the lignin causing the yellowing. It will continue to deteriorate unless it's very expensively restored.

People worry about the permanence of information in the computer revolution. Before that was the problem of permanence of information in the revolution of cheap wood-based paper. Before that things were usually written on parchment/vellum, which lasts effectively forever if kept in moderate storage conditions.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (3, Insightful)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059701)

- 1 Missing the point.

The whole point of this was to show you it disappearing. End of. No more. Done.

Putting into a medium designed for longevity would be precisely against the intention of the work. How do you demonstrate the effect of a highly mobile medium on literature if you protect against that effect ? Do you (can you) see DRM in action through the medium of paper ? It is impossible because you can always go back a page - not so with this. This is ice sculpture for the modern age.

Blasphemers! (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062925)

How dare you preserve something That Must Die!

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

jvkjvk (102057) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063955)

Well, perhaps not missing the point.

How do you demonstrate the effect of a highly mobile medium on literature if you protect against that effect ?

Well, perhaps there is less of an effect to be demonstrated since this clearly rebuts your premise.

Certainly it may be against the intent of the artist but perhaps the point to be made is that the work is much more resilient than you think.

Do you (can you) see DRM in action through the medium of paper ? It is impossible because you can always go back a page - not so with this. This is ice sculpture for the modern age.

Yes, we can do so even with this. period. We now know experientially that the "ice sculpture for the modern age" can be placed in a "modern age refrigerator" and be kept indefinitely, DRM or no.

The true issue of DRM is the legal ramification, not the technological limitations it imposes (as we can see, we are even able to recover this poem).

Regards.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26060947)

"Worse it was stored very poorly:

>>>UC Santa Barbara used forensic computing to restore the code from an original diskette

This is why you should always print your source"

          I've looked into forensic software. It's basically dd or dd_rescue with better analysis utilities. They would have had to use dd if it's not a plain FAT filesystem disk, not necessarily due to disk degradation. Remember this was meant as a one-shot disk, not archival, so they had no reason to make the disk standard.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062025)

The Sumerians [ancientscripts.com] had a pretty decent system, as far as longevity goes. I think I'm going to have my autobiography printed up on clay tablets and stored in a salt cave in southern NM. Should get some longevity out of that.

Re:In a world of art that's mostly disposable... (1)

electrons_are_brave (1344423) | more than 5 years ago | (#26070363)

So the collector had resisted the temptation to view the poem? I wasn't quite clear about that. I once went to an exhibit which had a parcel (wrapped up) from the 1920's which hadn't been opened due to the death of the person to whom it was intended. The person was famous, although I had never heard of her and don't recall the name. It reminded me of Agrippa. It's not the contents that matter, it's the decision (if you owned the parcel or the disc) of do I open it or not. I, of course wouldn't have been able to resist. So hat's off (maybe) to the fortitude of the collector.

hurray (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26059001)

site already down

So (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26059005)

Does this mean that this post will erase itself after initial posting?

Re:So (1, Funny)

Maguscrowley (1291130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059061)

If only most "first posts" did that ...

Re:So (1)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059087)

This post will self-destruct in five seconds. [Poster walks away while the MI theme song plays in the background.]

Re:So (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26073165)

Good morning, mr. Gibson.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to gain karma om Slashdot. All use of excessive explosions have been authorised.

Good luck, William.

(cue more music and pyrotechnics)

Yawn (1, Insightful)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059057)

I know this is art, but what's the big deal. So a poem scrolls up a screen and dies. Talk about read once approach to processing.

Is this a big deal because it got marketed well, it had big names associated with it? I feel like I did when I walked through the Delaware Arts museum, stopped to look at a canvas with colored straight lines and thought...huh? I love art, I love the idea of creativity (which is why I love programming), but Agrippa? it is a 5th grade programming project or a hackers toss off. The polygon Mona Lisa was a better article.

So for the first and maybe last time burn some karma and say "nothing to see here, move along please".

"I don't know much about art.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26059255)

...but I know what I like."

Re:Yawn (5, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059285)

it is a 5th grade programming project

So, let me get this straight. You were writing programs that RSA encrypt data embedded within its own executable in the 5th grade?

Wow. And here I was just writing programs in LOGO that made a turtle move around the screeen. :(

You were a gifted child, weren't you?

Re:Yawn (2, Insightful)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059887)

Actually, interestingly enough, RSA is about as simple a cryptosystem as they come (next to OTP, that is). Really. The complexity is actually in the key generation (and even that is pretty simple once you've got a couple large primes). But once you have them, the actual encryption algorithm is dead simple.

'course, that's not to say it ain't still an impressive accomplishment. But it's no DES implementation. :)

Re:Yawn (2, Informative)

Otto (17870) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060453)

RSA encryption: c = m^e mod n.

It really is something a 5th grader could write. The security is in the selection of e and n (and d, for decryption).

Re:Yawn (2, Insightful)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062727)

RSA encryption: c = m^e mod n.

It really is something a 5th grader could write. The security is in the selection of e and n (and d, for decryption).

Assuming of course you wanted to decrypt it. That doesn't seem to be part of the design in this case.

Re:Yawn (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063149)

I think I can get it down to 1st grader level:

include rsa;
rsa_encrypt(stuffToEncrypt);

Re:Yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26063923)

How many fifth graders do you know who can find the multiplicative inverse of e mod n?

Re:Yawn (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 5 years ago | (#26075207)

Uhh, you only have to do that to decrypt, which is precisely what he *didn't* implement.

Re:Yawn (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26067831)

Man. You guys keep focusing on the simplicity of the alorithm, completely ignoring key generation and the fact that the data is embedded in the executable. That's a lot harder than it sounds.

Re:Yawn (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061155)

Wait, this poem was 1992? What makes it special?

When I programmed Rando's Poetic License (premiered at the Washington Project for the Arts in 1978), there was deliberately no storage. The poem was not recoverable at all, and needed not algorithmic protection. That's it? Protection? Rando would scroll poems on the screen and be gone. Each time the program was re-run, a new poem was created -- sometimes a few lines, sometimes dozens or hundreds of lines. The only way to catch it was to run it to the printer, and I have a collection of 1,000 "jophxo" poems created with Rando, and my 1991 composition A Time Machine used 13 of them. The audience contributed vocabulary to the poem, so each performance had a new character -- and they would read the scrolling poems, which would be mixed into a live electronic performance.

Or am I missing some geeky thing that Gibson did?

Dennis

Re:Yawn (1)

kv9 (697238) | more than 5 years ago | (#26064979)

Or am I missing some geeky thing that Gibson did?

problem is you're some old guy from the internet that back in his day walked uphill both ways, while this is Gibson.

Re:Yawn (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 5 years ago | (#26065087)

Sorry. Gibson, though one year older than me, was a bit of a latecomer in a lot of things that other people did much earlier and had grown past by the time he discovered them. But cult fame allows history to be rewritten, doesn't it?

Re:Yawn (1)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 5 years ago | (#26069129)

When you get around to defining a cultural point of view let us know, ok?

Re:Yawn (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 5 years ago | (#26069675)

Gibson made his niche. My comment is only about historical fact, in this case Gibson being given credit for something others did first. Being all shivery over Agrippa is cultish, not cultural.

Re:Yawn (1)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 5 years ago | (#26069845)

Worrying about who did something first is the trade of the hack critic and the hallmark of the art world poseur.

In other news... (0, Offtopic)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061169)

I found some CDs with old DOS games that I thought were lost.
A friend of mine that has been collecting them since the late 80's once burned me a copy. CD Writer it was burned on was a powerful 2X Traxdata SCSI drive.
And I have kept them safe all these years, but one of them still got lost. Probably borrowed to someone who forgot to return it.
BUT...

Since he has recently decided to make another backup on a DVD, he gave me his original CDs. Didn't have the heart to throw them away.
And what do you know - his copy of the CD I was missing is just fine and readable despite being scratched a bit.

And to top it off - he lost his DVD he made the copy to.
And called me today to ask if I can make him a copy.
He also completely forgot he gave me his originals.

 

 
I wonder... Had I submitted this a story, would 39 guys find THIS story as interesting as the story about how they managed to copy a floppy?

Gibson Channeling Kovacs (2, Insightful)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062499)

I love art

Thanks for clarifying that.

Lookit, I'm no expert on the topic, but as I recall the whole thing from when it debuted in '92, the use of the self-scrolling, self-encrypting gimmick was Gibson's toe-dip into a whole new creative medium.

The poem was about his mother, memories for whom were very dim, ephemeral even. Gibson selected this new "self-destructing" medium as a metaphor, to facilitate the poetry: Once you had read the poem, you could not go back and re-visit it, you had to rely upon your memory only -- as did the poem's writer, creating it.

Don't compare it to what Da Vinci did with fine art, compare it to what Ernie Kovaks did with the new medium of television. Now, you watch Kovaks' schtick with switchers today, and it all seems goofy and trite -- but back then it was obviously well though-out, never before seen, and geeky as hell.

Kinda like "Agrippa."

Re:Gibson Channeling Kovacs (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063095)

RobotRunAmok: as I recall the whole thing from when it debuted in '92, the use of the self-scrolling, self-encrypting gimmick was Gibson's toe-dip into a whole new creative medium.

If the encryption algorithm was the whole deal, then you may be right. Otherwise, this process of poetic generation went back 20 years or more earlier -- several technology generations, with multiple approaches to the poetic algorithms. I first encountered it on a Teletype-based machine connected via a phoneline from New York to an Illinois mainframe; that was 1973, and the paper-based output couldn't be 'encrypted'. My own interactive scrolling version first appeared publicly in 1978. It was by no means a whole new creative medium -- except perhaps to Gibson.

Re:Gibson Channeling Kovacs (1)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066245)

A woman who had never read Shakespeare went to a performance of Hamlet and complained, "I don't know what anybody sees in that play. It's just a bunch of cliches strung together."

The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (5, Funny)

krou (1027572) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059083)

"The 2008 incarnation of the poem consists of custom-built software that, when /. readers try to read the poem, it is encrypted in a weird Web-based algorithm that transforms the text into a message saying 'Error establishing a database connection'.

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26059169)

My version of the poem translated to "page can't be displayed"!!!!

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

Sanat (702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059171)

Obviously, it is a substitution code.

You read 'Error establishing a database connection'.

I read 'about the love of life, the lovely woman, and the angst of making a choice'.

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

ashtophoenix (929197) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059457)

Its art and can be interpreted in many ways. For example mine is "Network error, connection timed out" ! How exquisite !

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060679)

Mine reads:

Connection Interrupted
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection. Please try again.

Fascinating stuff.

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (3, Funny)

mazarin5 (309432) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060771)

"The 2008 incarnation of the poem consists of custom-built software that, when /. readers try to read the poem, it is encrypted in a weird Web-based algorithm that transforms the text into a message saying 'Error establishing a database connection'.

Sorry, that was my fault. I was the first one to visit the website, and it consequently encrypted itself. I should have mirrored it.

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

danieltdp (1287734) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060795)

With the added feature that the text will never get transformed because none of us RTFA

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

ethicalBob (1023525) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061089)

lol... i was going to mod you 'funny' but then found your statement to be true at 10:57 EST


Network Timeout

The server at agrippa.english.ucsb.edu is taking too long to respond.

Re:The 2008 /. version of the poem ... (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26064357)

Slow down, Poet Laureate! It has been 8 minutes since you last read a poem!

Que? (2, Insightful)

mrpacmanjel (38218) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059187)

I have to say the book is beautifully put together - a real work of art.

But I have read the poem (a copy of it is on Gibson's website) isn't it a bit pretentious?

However as a piece of art it is an interesting idea (minus the poem).

Re:Que? (1)

k_187 (61692) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059405)

it really is an interesting idea, particularly in today's age of "your data is around forever, whether you want it to be or not", current developments not withstanding. I always thought this was fascinating, for that reason. There's a certain amount of permanency to computers. They've been in use for all of my lifetime, and its hard to envision a time before they were ubiquitous (for me at least). I think this poem is really designed to show how ethereal bits can (and possibly should) be.

Re:Que? (2, Interesting)

Magada (741361) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059663)

Old enough to get it, are you? Hrm. haven't gone far enough in your thinking though. The text is not destroyed after reading. It is encrypted. It's the digital equivalent of locking something away and then throwing the key into the sea.

It was probably Gibson's way of saying he's trying to forget whatever made him make Agrippa in the first place. I also think he did it knowing full well that the text will be recovered. Dunno what this means in the context of the work (it's not a poem, although it contains a poem).

At this point, you're probably pondering if Gibson really gave that much thought to what was essentially a side-project for him. He did. He's careful like that.

Re:Que? (2, Interesting)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059935)

At this point, you're probably pondering if Gibson really gave that much thought to what was essentially a side-project for him. He did. He's careful like that.

To this day I am still amazed at how prescient he was in Neuromancer. The details -- all wrong, killing each other over a few megs of RAM, the virtual reality helmet, yadda yadda. The real interesting part is the atmosphere, e.g., at one point they go to a site that where people have been scrawling passwords for various high profile computers everwhere, where Gibson comments that a few days later the passwords would be covered up, but the site would spring up somewhere else, it sounds just like the game of whack-a-mole that the content distributors play with the pirates. Pirate bay gets shut down? Mirrors spring up in three different countries. Or the idea of mobs playing a heavy influence in the workings of the internet underworld, where now a lot of the botnets seem to be controlled by mobs, as well as the myriad small-fry scammers, cheats, etc. who are always willing to hack your credit to make a few bucks.

Re:Que? (1)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066325)

So what you're saying is that even if he doesn't have perfect clairvoyance as far as events are concerned, William Gibson really gets people, better than most people even understand themselves? I'd agree with that.

pay attention (4, Insightful)

hal9000(jr) (316943) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059959)

an alternative interpretation is that in a world that Gibson envisioned where data is fleeting and we are deluged with it, there are times when you need to pay attention.

This poem, for all intents and purposes self destructs after the first reading. Therefore, you should pay attention the first time--you won't get another chance.

That was, I think, the intent. Whether he could have written a program that would have enforced that intent better is beside the point (apparently it was "broken"). For the average reader, you'd get one shot.

It's still a compelling thought.

Re:pay attention (1)

Bright Apollo (988736) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060445)

+1 on actually getting it. This is exactly what he was attempting to convey, the ephemeral existence we all share. I think he acknowledged that folks with the griefer-gene would recover it, but he wasn't targeting them anyway, was he?

-BA

Re:pay attention (2, Interesting)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 5 years ago | (#26064873)

Interesting iinterpretation, but it is contradicted by William Gibson's own blog post [williamgibsonbooks.com] about Agrippa. In that post Gibson says:

Ashbaugh's design eventually included a supposedly self-devouring floppy-disk intended to display the text only once, then eat itself. Today, there seems to be some doubt as to whether any of these curious objects were ever actually constructed. I certainly don't have one myself.

From this I would have to conclude that Gibson wasn't involved in the whole "one chance" aspect of the work.

Re:Que? (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060019)

And I had the chance to meet him when I was in grad school, and he said that Agrippa was a dedication to his father (Gibson lost his parents at a fairly young age).

Re:Que? (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066011)

But I have read the poem (a copy of it is on Gibson's website) isn't it a bit pretentious?

It *is* a poem, so yes.

you FAI7 it... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26059407)

IndeciAsion 4nd

Good art (4, Interesting)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#26059467)

Good art requires the viewer to think. What is more indicative of the state of social consumerism and the temporary nature of anything, than a document that allows precisely one viewing then removes itself from the page. Not to mention the indirect commentary on the transitory nature of language as a communication mechanism. It doesn't matter what the theme of the poem was, the art was the action of allowing one reading then visibly degrading the communication to the point where it was no longer communicating anything other than loss. What is poetic about a sunset ? The scientific fact that the sun is merely being hidden by the rotation of the earth ? Or the mental notion of the day coming to an end, time passing, out with the old, everything dies, sadness, hope etc. ?

I would see Gibsons work as deliberately demonstrating the sadness of work being published, read, then being removed from view and denying future readings. Very nice work considering the date it was first published, and our current problems with DRM and copyright.

Re:Good art (1)

stainless-steel-vash (1290528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060803)

As a poet, I find the idea interesting...I have debated a similar idea for a while (this is the first I have heard of this particular poem or idea). It really makes one think about what makes art. For example, if I read a poem while blaring an air horn so you can't hear it, then destroy the paper so it can't be reread, would that still be art? Does art inherently exist or must it be witnessed and understood to be art? My only beef with reproducing the piece without the "DRM" is that it defeats the uniqueness and umph that having it be a 1 read piece adds to it. Although, back to the original post and idea...if the poem sucks then you can add all the bells and whistles you want, it will still suck...I will have to read the piece to decide.

Re:Good art (1)

stainlesssteelpat (905359) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061003)

strange, why do poets like steel, is it a hark to ozzymandis?

Re:Good art (1)

stainless-steel-vash (1290528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061083)

Well, the pen is supposedly mightier than the sword. At least until you get run through. Although my login is a reference to Harry Harrison. Since I forgot my password and login for the last 2 I setup...should have posted more often.

Re:Good art (1)

stainlesssteelpat (905359) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061487)

hence stainlesssteelpat as opposed to the rodent variety that is my family nickname. you're the first i've met. Nice to meet a kindred spirit.

Re:Good art (3, Insightful)

fracai (796392) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061029)

I think the real trick is to display a work of art, while concealing said art, while also not allowing the act of concealing to turn into art itself. It seems to me that many would consider the "performance" of concealing the poem a work of art in itself.

I also have a hard time stating that "bad art" is "not art".
And I struggle over whether "not art" can be "accidental art".

Re:Good art (1)

stainless-steel-vash (1290528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26061541)

Very good point, that could be why I haven't gone through with it...I dislike guerilla perfomance, where the performance becomes more of a point than the art. The idea would be akin to: if a tree falls in the forest and you aren't there does it make a noise...if a poem goes off in a crowd, and no one pays attention, is is still a poem? Bad art is still art...but it still sucks. Anything that makes one think beyond just the physical presentation (words, colors, sounds, etc.) should be art...but that is also in the eye of the beholder (or the beer holder).

Buhddist sand art (3, Interesting)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060891)

That's a major factor in Buhddist/Nepalese sand art (proper name escapes me): a great deal of effort goes into making an intricate work of art, only to have it brushed away a few days later.

From the Japanese samurai classic text Hagakure: "In the Kamigata area, they have a sort of tiered lunchbox they use for a single day when flower viewing. Upon returning, they throw them away, trampling them underfoot. The end is important in all things."

Re:Buhddist sand art (1)

spiko-carpediem (748307) | more than 5 years ago | (#26075775)

(proper name escapes me)

sand mandala

Re:Good art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26062549)

It's a fine line between good art and earnest first year Art Student wank.

Yeah, we get it. Nothing lasts forever.

The whole thing was a gimmick to raise the artistic status of a mediocre poem.

Re:Good art (2, Interesting)

Omestes (471991) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063437)

Though creating something and destroying is rather a cliche. How many artists have painted a picture, then dowsed it in gasoline and destroyed it forever immediately after? Or, like Duchamp, made intentionally made installations of materials that decay to add the aspect of time and temporariness to them.

This isn't to rain on anyones parade, or say the idea isn't valid. Being that it is a common theme among modern arts, it surely represents something in society, some important concept.

I was tempted to write this post, then click "cancel" to prove my point.

Re:Good art (1)

Alomex (148003) | more than 5 years ago | (#26082847)

Good art requires the viewer to think.

I call BS. Michelangelo's David does not require you to think.

Thinking as part of art is a XX century affectation. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with a piece of art that makes you go hmmm, but it should not in anyway be a requirement.

What is worse, there is a lot of really bad modern art out there that tries to cover this fact by making you think a lot. A good piece of art moves you aesthetically. Some pieces of art have no underlying message beyond that, others do. Granted a deep message can enhance the aesthetic experience, but it is not a requirement.

I've studied Agrippa (4, Funny)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060707)

This is only news if your opponent has studied his Agrippa.... which I have.

Re:I've studied Agrippa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26064127)

I am not left handed either.

Re:I've studied Agrippa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26066659)

From "Anonymous Coward?

Men as in masks cannot be trusted.

Dang (0)

alexborges (313924) | more than 5 years ago | (#26060973)

AGRIPPA will achieve conscience just by sheer slashdotting.

Why the bigotry? (0, Troll)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062461)

I don't understand why there are so many bigoted articles on this web site. You guys are a bunch of racist. Why the hell are you all throwing around racist slurs like "black holes?" Good grief. Why can't we simply refer to them as "luminescence-challenged singularities" or something else which isn't so racist? You've offended my hyper-sensitive politically-correct psyche!

Now excuse me while I go emo and sulk for a bit.

Re:Why the bigotry? (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#26066861)

Troll? Have you no sense of humor?

In case you missed it, I was alluding to the BS you will see here:

http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/dallas-county-meeting-turns-ra.html [dallasnews.com]

It's so pathetic it's hilarious. Apparently some think that "black hole" is a racist term. If you modded me troll for this either you are oblivious to the news, or are like that politically correct moron Judge Thomas Jones.

how to break programs on old macintoshes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26062717)

call the poweroff function, not shutoff. and while you're at it you might as well write that instruction into the jump table address of the debugger.

then, when the power goes off, the connection between the data and resource forks is broken.

Fun project (1)

mveloso (325617) | more than 5 years ago | (#26062831)

I remember working on this for a bit. One reason it was a bit more difficult than normal to crack open is we replaced all the appropriate 68k exception vectors with RTEs, so you couldn't hop into Macsbug or do an NMI and disassemble anything.

Once multifinder came out that method died, because the exception vectors were on a per-process basis. You could just break into another app and dump the RAM.

I vaguely remember that it was a fun and interesting idea back in the day. Plus, it was william gibson, and his aura was much stronger back then.

Slashdotted (1)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 5 years ago | (#26063311)

FROM SITE:

Due to overwhelming demand, The Agrippa Files site has been moved to a new server. There may be some delay as the DNS change propagates. Please try again in a few hours.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

-- The Agrippa Files Web Hosting Service

Here's the poem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26066071)

http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/SF-Archives/Misc/Agrippa

I thought my mac emulator was broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26067341)

LOL, I wanted to see this William Gibson Demo for the Mac so bad I found a MAC emulator for the PC to run it on. This C#*% doesn't work!

Analyzing the 800k diskette (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26067345)

For those of you involved with this project who want to correctly analyze that 800k diskette, you need a Catweasel card. This is an FPGA-based floppy controller which can be set to read just about any floppy that cannot be read by the standard PC controller chip. Yes, there are Linux drivers available.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...