| |
|
cybering
Saturday, July 15, 2000
"as...with a hundred "modern improvements": there is an illusion about them; there is not always a positive advance. The devil goes on exacting compound interest to the last for his early share and numerous succeeding investments in them. Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end, and end which it was already but too easy to arrive at; as railroads lead to Boston or new York. We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telelgraph from maine to texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate."
"I have received no more than one or two letters in my life that were worth the postage."
Henry David Thoreau
posted by nixie
Friday, July 14, 2000
Spark, an ezine 'exploring electronic consciousness,' is broader and glitzier than this site, with a variety of authors and topic categories. Found it listed on Trace's nice ezine list (on the links page here), and not at Astounding Websites, also useful.
Jeffrey Young is a journalist who runs a blog on journalism in/about cyberspace, and also wrote this interesting article on Katie.com, a book by a young woman who at 14 befriended a man online and then met him at a hotel. He was arrested.
posted by nixie
Tuesday, July 11, 2000
This IRC log, circa 96, is very time capsule meta. Most of the content is people playing with commands, renaming the mode, being confused about what's going on, and speculating about other channels.
excerpts:
*yoyopro* Stang, I'd like to see if you could dcc me your Netscape "bookmark.htm" file ....? I've been making a collection
P-Lil> Stang: So far this seems to be a pretty TYPICAL misuse of IRC.
Stang> I keep getting these weird RINGING noises. I AIN'T ANSWERING
P-Lil> Stang: I think that's the sound of people leaving. If you're using
IRCle, it'll do that.
Modemac> Wait another three years, and CU-SeeMe technology should reach the
point where we can do this via video and voice
dode> I don't have a mac but I do have a light brown anorak
DynaSoar> Modemac, in another 3 years the MWOWM terminals will either
transport you or recreate reailty around you.
RevNoah> P-Lil: Well, on the Mac at least, you somehow tell the irc client
where the file is. Then, whenever someone with a certain nick logs on, a face
is associated with them.
*** strings has changed the topic on channel #SubGenius to Your face is on
fire, and I ain't talkin
Modemac> RevNoah: Interesting. That must be how they designed those stupid
"Internet chat rooms" in the movie "The Net."
P-Lil> RevNoah: Are these taken from GIFs or JPEGs? Or are we talking about a
predefined library?
Modemac> I guess Metronet got its news server working again
RevNoah> Modemac: I didn't see that movie
Modemac> RevNoah: You're not missing much. Wannabe Hitchcock imitation that
is only noteworthy because the term "The Internet" is used all over the place.
*** yoyopro has changed the topic on channel #SubGenius to I'll tell you when your face is smouldering
P-Lil> RevNoah: I do have a Mac, but last time I admitted such I got so much
crap I had to clean out my hard drive, twice.
Modemac> And what's more, it just tries to use the old-fashioned Hollywood
plot "Innocent discovers secret, is chased by bad guys who want the secret."
RevNoah> Modemac: yeah, I hate it how you see that word everywhere you
look...movies, the paper, the news...it sucks.
_dad_> I got my faces file in place now. What a dumb gimmick.
Modemac> RevNoah: That's why I refuse to use that idiotic phrase "Surfing the
Net."
P-Lil> Damn, what's going on? *checks her auto-DCC setup*
RevNoah> _dad_ : I thrive on dumb gimmicks
Modemac> I'm sitting here right now in my pajamas, sweating from a long day,
reading alt.sex.stories in one window and IRC in another. And you want ME to
use an idiotic MTV "hip cool" term to describe this? FUCK that! I don't surf
for NOBODY.
_dad_> How could you be reading this with one eye and alt.sex.stories with the
other?
Modemac> _dad_: "Bob" taught me how to do it.
Modemac> Pictures. That reminds me - I've got to find a better picture of
myself to replace that one at SubSite...
P-Lil> Modemac: I mean, you wouldn't want to BROWSE... that's so unsexy, you
know.
_dad_> so is this EFNET irc party any better than this one?
Modemac> I think EFNET crashes more often.
Modemac> Stang: Tell them to log their stuff and post it to alt.slack!
Stang> "Pebbles" is downstairs "FTPing" Bam-Bam.
PeeKat> I was on Internet IRC, not Undernet...
P-Lil> Pee: You mean EFnet? or DALnet? Or... damn, how many IRC networks ARE
there?!?
PeeKat> Stang: Tell Sivet to tell the others (where she is) to join a new
server, like tampa.fl.us.undernet.org
MSakamoto> Ogyr--did that get through? Bugger all, I hate Pipeline...
*** Mode change "+m " on channel #SubGenius by yoyopro
*P-Lil* See the channel window in IRCle, with the switch marked "m"? Switch it
down. Yoyopro's being an idjit.
Stang> LOU has returned. Praise "LOU." Janor knew of "LOU."
*P-Lil* Type in /mode #subgenius +o p-lil
*PeeKat* So we can't type onto the channel...where are we supposed to type to?
*DynaSoar* Will you please do a /mode -m ?
Stang> This is such a beautiful togetherness experience... like Woodstock. TEAR DOWN
THE FENCES!
*P-Lil* I'll explain how to shut off the sound effects if you just OP me.
Nobody can talk because Yoyopro set the channel that way, and I need to undo
it.
*Modemac* What it means is: Yoyopro set the channel to "moderated." Only people
set to "ops" status can talk right now.
*P-Lil* So, PLEASE... "/mode #subgenius +o p-lil"
*DynaSoar* yoyopro has shut us all off
strings> Actually, your going to have to put some thought into how this
channel is going to be handled
Or crazy jerks like me will screw it up for everyone
*P-Lil* You are seeing PRIVATE messages. You can set a channel to be
"moderated", so only channel operators can talk. Yoyopro did this, so only
strings (an op), you (an op), and girloi8 (an op) can talk openly on channel.
*DynaSoar* Pleas type /mode -m
*P-Lil* If you JUST type in "/mode #subgenius +o p-lil" that will make ME an
op, so I can undo this stupidity?
Stang> Thank you everyone for trying to show how many tricks you can play. Now...
can you just let those of us who are not trying to play tricks, PROCEED?
*P-Lil* Let me put this more simply. Strings/Yoyopro has taken the channel
HOSTAGE.
*Modemac* Unfortunately, the person who sabataged the channel left right after
he did it. So someone else will have to fix it.
*ogyr* what's the deal here? why can't we say shit?
PeeKat> About time!
That fucking SUCKED> I seem to be getting private messages from so many people at once that there
is no point in continuing. I can't tell what's private and what's not.
Stang> My computer here was ringing and ringing, and all these strange starred
messages that made no sense at all were flooding in.
girloi8> hey y'all...creamo like, quit IRC but is still here because he has a
575 ping reply
Stang> Makes me feel like an idiot, to tell the truth.
I have an IRC primer, I just haven't had time to exercise all the fancy
tricks yet.
PeeKat> Stang: Strings basically made it impossible for ANY of us to write
anything! So we had to private message you...
ogyr> about fucking time! private messages are starred.
ljduchez> This reminds me of Usenet, but faster messages with less to say.
DynaSoar> Ivan, at least read up on the /mode commands
PeeKat> First rule of IRC: *never, never, NEVER* use /mode +m
P-Lil> PeeKat: Actually, it has its uses, and misuses. :/
PeeKat> ogry: That depends on your IRC...on mine, private messages are in brakets
PeeKat> Lil: mode +m is just EVIL. ANARCHY RAINS SUPREEM!
P-Lil> PeeKat: Hey, some people CONSENT to moderated channels. They LIKE it.
It comes in handy in limited applications. But let's not debate that.
PeeKat> Moderation in anything, even moderation, is evil.
posted by nixie
Thursday, July 06, 2000
Email and IMs as demonstrating intention or propensity to act in a certain way.. dicey when in the hands of the legal system.
The conviction and subsequent overturning of that conviction of Oliver Jovanovic, for a few months New York's poster boy of the sadistic internet geek archetype, gesture toward the current inability of the legal system to understand or accomodate the unique nature of online communications.
Jovanovic was convicted of kidnap and rape following a prolonged encounter at the first meeting with his online correspondent. The conviction was subsequently overturned when the appeals court ruled that the Rape Shield law precluding evidence showing the victim's prior sexual conduct was misapplied when emails indicating the victim's interest in sadomasochistic play were excluded as evidence in the trial. The appeal.
Media response, including this Psychology Today article, tended to focus on the woman's emails as strong evidence that Jovanovic had grounds for thinking that she was seeking a sadomasochistic encounter as a submissive. The most-quoted (and excluded from the original trial) excerpt was something to the effect "now I'm his slave and its painful, but the fun of telling my friends 'hey, i'm a sadomasochist' more than outweighs the torment." (This alone to me shows that it was the thrill of being seen as out-there by others rather than any true desire that motivated her.. kind of like 'the thrill of saying 'i have tattoos and piecings' is the best part of having given in to mtv-driven images of hipness').
While I agree that the trial would have been fairer had the emails been included, I'm not so convinced that the outcome would have been different. At its best, this trial could have served as either a litmus test or perhaps groundbreaker of our society's ability to deal with email and message communications as an indication of intent.
My own take, and it would have been interesting to see this develop in the trial, is that Jovanovic, 31, whatever his sterling qualities as a scientist and academic, showed poor judgement to the extent of criminality in his encounter with his correspondent. He behaved like a sadist, sure, but a sadist with zero commitment to creating a mutual sm encounter; more like an inexperienced and fantasy driven 'master-teacher' with no boundaries, sensitivity, appropriateness, or limits.
The woman, a 19 year old college student was clearly both inexperienced and full of bravado. Her tough-stance Borroughs-knockoff prose, her shiny-eyed wonder at Janovic's polished and 'superior' dark side references, and her messy personal life should have served as a big red flag to a man 11 years her senior. The media repeated her emailed interest in making a snuff film as some sort of indication of her complicity in debauched behavior.
For anyone with experience online, particularly in AOL chat, where the two met, it seems clear that she was a wannabe.. intrigued, yes, but talking (or typing) way out of her league in a sort of fantasy persona of a dangerous wild woman.
That's what interests me. How will our legal system come to handle, or even acknowledge, the nuances of truth or fantasy in the statements people make about themselves in chat, emails, or on websites. In this case, it's clear to me that this woman wanted to impress Jovanovic, who she saw as experienced and brilliant (in fact, I'd even go as far as to say that the attraction had a solidly old-fashioned dimension in that a lost and needy young woman finds a successful and condescending mentor/lover; I'd also bet that under all her tough talk she kinda wanted him to be her traditional-style boyfriend), and she tailored her advances to suit what she felt he'd find alluring.
Despite her interest and coy invitingness, I think that the encounter was criminal. Again, this is a gray area not well addressed by our legal system. Until quite recently, rape within marriage was not believed to be possible. And it's difficult for vanilla folk (I won't say 'normal' or 'mainsteam' because I believe that the 'general public' posited by news reports, that conservative, wholesome, shockable, and pursed-lip disapproving mass, is a complete construct, perpetuated as a moral counterbalance to the sensationalized information that the media serves up framed with lip service to their shock).. it's difficult to understand or evaluate how rape can take place within an encounter that has built-in consent to violation. But it certainly can.
Both participants in this scene showed horrible judgement, and titillating emails notwithstanding, had set no ground rules for the limits of their encounter. But Jovanovic transgressed even the outer limits of the bdsm community's behavior. Completely no-limits play, which can then include ignoring the partner's refusal, take place within established relationships (that actually often include a contract).
Allowing herself to be tied up by a stranger in the first meeting showed appalling judgement, but it was Jovanovic who took advantage of that, who kept her against her will for 20 hours (absolutely extreme time for a scene, even for partners experienced with one another and within an ongoing consensual relationship), and who violated her body against her will.
Of course, this is difficult stuff in the sense that.. if her will, in a larger sense, is to be violated when she protests, he would have been within the limits of play. But in this instance, I think she showed nothing more than naiive curiosity overlaid with some baroque goth-speak, and that her real fear and panic and attempts to escape had no history or context within which Janovic would have been justified in disregarding them. She did not consent to having her limits exceeded, and no emails that show that she found the idea appealing justify the real-time encounter that took place. (I would argue that even had they typed such a scene to one another in instant message or chat, that would not serve as consent for those typed actions to play out.)
It will be interesting to see what cases and circumstances bring these distinctions from the factionalized hairsplitting of the bdsm community into our court system, and how facile 'the public' (that solidly normal and disapproving construct from which we are to understand is always drawn our juries) is in dealing with it in criminal cases.
In a strange way, I feel that justice was served despite itself in this instance. The trial was neither fair nor complete. But Jovanovic was granted a punishment that truly fit his crime. He was unjustly imprisoned and tortured in both his media vilification and with hopelessness. Then, like his victim, he was suddenly free, free to be grateful, as she put it in an email subsequent to their encounter "happy to be alive." She, in turn, was spared the public trial of (like rape victims of yore, and if this comes up again in rape trials, at even a deeper level of exposure, since email fantasies and flirtations have both the seeming irrefutability of the written word, and the seeming context of total privacy) having her private sexual fantasies used as ground to justify brutality against her. She might well tell him now, as he did in an email after the encounter; "I don't think you learned as much as you should have." What she had to learn, of course, was quite different from what he felt he had to teach, which she has probably learned all too well.
related articles:: A Tortured Case (zdnet). Rape Shield law misused. (Court TV). Cybersex convition reversed on appeal. (New York law journal).
Excerpts I especially like from the opinion of the one dissenting Appeals Court judge.:: "Justice Mazzarelli agreed with the majority that some of the excluded messages should have been admitted on the question of the student's "state of mind and defendant's perception of her thinking."
What evoked Justice Mazzarelli's ire was the majority's decision to admit statements relating to her relationship with Luke. "Given the complainant's right to sexual self-determination, I would find that the inflammatory nature of the evidence of her prior sexual conduct would, in the eyes of the jury, outweigh the probative value of the evidence. Presenting this information could mislead the jury to conclude that the complainant was more likely to consent to the charged sexual offenses because she had previously consented to similar, violent acts."
Justice Mazzarelli also took issue with the majority's conclusion that the strength of the defense's evidence that the student had initially agreed to a sadomasochistic encounter reflected on whether or not she had subsequently withdrawn that consent.
"I strongly disagree," she wrote. " The encounter should be evaluated on the basis that the complainant, as any person engaging in sexual activities, had a continuing legal right to withdraw her consent to any of the actions taking place in Jovanovic's apartment." "
posted by nixie
Monday, July 03, 2000
7/5 addendum. Here's a discussion thread about sex education:: who should provide it, at what age and with what messsage? A few posts later, this is the type of discourse:: "I do take Saussure and Jakobson seriously, in contrast to Lacan or Derrida. I am surprised at home much confusion has arisen from my statements about "facts". Part of this is my fault. Many of us shoot from the hip on the internet, which makes for ambiguity, contradiction and a lot of beautiful non-standard language. Let me try to be a little more sober and systematic. I do not deny the existence of the world outside myself. I deny my direct access to it. I am not in favor of any kind of Bishop Berkley-style subjectivity. " This from the same man who posts "This is where I get mean and call you a sadly misguided cunt. Todd can always tell me to shut the fuck up and not to throw stones on his site. You ARE selling an ideology, as anyone with a brain who read my "parish priest" parable knows." The best response to his pompous grandstanding was by the moderator, who quoted from Trollalert.com: "The common Usenet definition: Somebody who is "trolling" (as in fishing) for someone to take the bait. People who take the bait will become engaged in an exchange with the troll while those who recognize a troll in action may simply sit back and "enjoy" the action...The best advice for handling trolls: ignore them. Deny them what they seek: provoking others. If they can't find the attention they seek, they'll usually leave to seek better fishing elsewhere."
I've been interested in the formation, cohesion, and splintering of online communities, and just found this nominally webdesigners' bulletin board site in its last thread of how-we-fall-apart. It's funny how the comments of how topic discussions devolved into flamewars are almost generic... the egroups weblog groups ended on this note, and I've heard old AOLers bemoaning their favorite chatrooms (there was one called the Chateau, I think, that was an especially close community) with the same rhetoric. Paradigmatic.Glassdog Club
Paul Perry, of Alamut, often waxes lyrical about the philosphy of webbing. Here, his thoughts on Learning by Linking:
"It is remarkable how much we can actually learn simply by linking, by creating paths or trails to sites that we don't have the time or energy or knowledge to completely explore for ourselves. The truth is that we never have enough time or energy or knowledge to travel in all the different directions and dimensions that we want to go. So we create trails for later, trails that others can follow.
Occasionally one of our trails, in the hands of another hunter, becomes an arrow. The other hunter sees something that we didn't see, fires the arrow and strikes a magnificent animal. Mortally wounded the great beast collapses in the snow. The other hunter is pleased -- the trophy is large enough to provide days of food (for thought). Pulling out her sharpest knife she immediately removes what she needs and leaves the remainder behind for her friends -- as a gift.
'Learning by linking' is a very handy way of gaining knowledge and a worthy addition to our repertoire of learning (hunting) strategies. Its success requires that we often return to our own trails, that we know who the other members of our hunting party are, and that we watch their trails very carefully."
And.. his thoughts on Web Presence (and absence):
"Have you ever noticed how...
...in the physical world people are either present or absent, but not both? And that you, as a physical person, have the choice between being either here or there? And if you are not here or there, and you have chosen not to stay in touch with those that are either here or there, that you are absent?
In other words, in the physical world the choice is yours about whether or not to be present or absent. You control this. You decide if you want to be absent from someone or some place or some group. If you want to be absent you simply remove yourself from their locality. You are still present but not for the people or place in question.
Have you ever noticed how maintaining a web presence makes this sort of thing impossible? With a web site the only way be absent from the people or places you wish to avoid (ex-job, ex-friends, creditors, the taxman...) is take down your site. Absence on the web is different from absence in the physical world. It is not something you can selectively control. In order to become absent you have to relinquish your presence entirely.
Conclusion: Maintaining a web presence means that absence is no longer possible."
posted by nixie
Sunday, July 02, 2000
It was exciting to see the Cybering stats skyrocket, but it wasn't from Mitsu's fine post, and exceeded the spike that a link from Flutterby a few weeks ago provided.
Yes, the AOL search engine has found Cybering, and folk are clicking in who searched for "cybersex -- how to", "sexchatsites", and "exhibitionism". First of all, welcome, aolers. Second, damn that I don't have something to sell to your eager eyes. And third, this is a magazine and weblog about the online experience. If you'd like to write about it.. even write about your frustration in locating good sexchatsites, we are looking for material. Email contact is at the bottom of the page.
Lastly, I know other webloggers have had similar experiences with the AOL cataloguing system. People who search and surf through the AOL portal should be aware that your online experience is being sadly skewed and truncated. There are excellent (and pathetic) sites out there that you have no access to.
I'd like to give a few tips.. first, download Internet Explorer or Netscape (both are free programs and you can get to the sites to download by searching)... those can function as a stand-alone browser. I keep the icons for those programs in my taskbar and merely connect through aol and then launch a new browser. Next, don't search the web through aol keywords... use Yahoo, Google, InFind, Dogpile, HotBot, or AltaVista. (all of those sites are at www.(put name here).com).
Here are some good portals to find non-advertising glutted adult content online, which might be what some of you are looking for::
Jane's Net Sex Guide offers reviews of the best adult sites on the net. Femmerotic is a collective of erotic sites with high integrity. A blogger's Essay on Pornography. A page of links to writing about Cybersex. The aol sucks site. Shared stories and overview of cyberromance..a nice levelheaded approach. And a MSNBC article on cybersex addiction.
There are also cybersex links partway down this page if you scroll, and a section on our links page.
That all said, I found over time that the most rewarding way to be on the web is through participation. I think that, except for idle (or fervent) porn (or alien abduction, or whatever floats your boat) surfing, people are often most on here looking for connection to one another. Chat is one way, but fraught with both a junior high clique and gossip dynamic and with the real danger of one of the people 'just playing around' connecting with someone who takes them quite seriously, sometimes with damaging emotional consequences.
I'd recommend signing up for a video sex chat paysite if the desire is to merely get on and get off, but I've found that even the most cavalier are most interested in the openended improvisation of engaging an amateur, that is, a real person. There are plenty of personal ad sites and both women and men can be found who are looking for experimentation, through email or messaging.
But (theme music).. if you haven't stumbled upon the wonderful world of weblogging and journals online, here's another venue for both exhibitionistic and voyeuristic tendencies. Yes, people write about their lives. You can, too. To get started... go to Blogger or Weblogs, and click on the site titles that interest you. Most weblogs link to their favorite weblogs, and you can surf and sample and bookmark until satiated.
posted by nixie
|