More Insane Writings

[Dr. Dan]

did it make you laugh?


good.

[Dr. Dan]

The Conscience of a Cracker
by King Fisher

They say a Nihilist is a person who deny common values. This is not the whole truth. A Nihilist is a person who denies certain values and builds new values. A person who just deny common values and wants to kick and destroy society is rather an Renegade or plain Vandal, a prophet of non-values. Myself I prefer to call myself an adherer of the Zen-philosophy, the Fallibilism, or simply: a person who believes there are no such fixed entities as "good", "evil" or "private property", but they are all mere constructions of the human mind. I am a follower of Nietzsche in some sense, but I want to reach beyond Nietzsche since Nihilism is always creative.

They say crackers are evil bugs who just wants to rip off software companies and steal every penny out of the pockets of poor programmers. Myself I would say: "Information is free, just like the air, and noone has the right to build walls around it". If you thought crackers were just another bunch of raging Renegades wanting to tear down and destroy everything just for the fun of it, you are dead wrong. We are infact worse than that.

We tear down, yes, but we are proud of it, and we do it because we have to. Someone has to set freedom to this information. I crack not because I hate society, but because I love it and want to evolve it. I consider cracking a highly political action, and I most certainly think it is RIGHT to crack.

Now you are confused. Let me explain once again.

This year, 1995, I can walk into any public library, take out ANY book, go to the photocopier and make a copy of every page of it if I like. This is all perfectly legal, atleast here in Sweden. The Swedish state (and many other states as well) have decided it is every citizens right to copy book pages if s/he wants to.

Now, I walk home. I look on my CD-player. I am not allowed to copy any of my CD's to tape if I wish. It is illegal. I look on my videotapes. I am not allowed to copy them. It is illegal. I look on my diskboxes containing some Microsoft software I once bought. I am not allowed to copy these disks either. Well, I might make copies for safety reasons, but not to give away to friends. It is illegal.

This makes me sick! What's the difference between Software, CD's, Videotapes and the Books at my public library? It's all information, heavens sake! The problem in this case is not the information itself. The problem is that this society hardwired my brain to believe information could be owned, just like land or money, or like the Greek or the Cotton Farmers in southern America once believed PEOPLE could be owned, and called it slavery. I realize I am a slave of the information-controlling society. Because that is what it is all about. Control. Complete and utter total control.

I am not telling you I want chaos to replace copyright regulations. If I wanted chaos I would be a destructive beast and not a constructive citizen. I love our society, and I think it is one of the best things about the world there is. The cyberspace communities like the Scene or Usenet, I love even more since they are international and multi-cultural. That is why I want to tell society there is something wrong, I want to blow the whistle while there is still time.

I do not dislike or hate software companies. In fact, I want software comanies. I rather dislike the social structure and economic therms that both people and companies are bound by, and have to obey. I believe both companies and citizens to be prisoners of the economic system. You say someone has to pay. Why? What is this "pay" anyway? What is "owned knowledge" and "public knowledge"? Or to use the vocabulary of authority itself: What is this bogus thing called "Intellectual property" you make so much noise about? Which information am I allowed to own? Which information am I allowed to carry in my head?

To the people of the post-modern society economics, ownership and right to information is a religion. They adhere to economic gods and think they will be redempted the day they become yuppies in suits and ties, that the guy owning the most cars and electronic gadgets when he dies will win the game. My god how I hate these semi-gods. Information is all there is, yuppieheads. Perhaps William Gibson was the first to realize this in 1982. Yet very few people have understood what he really meant. Maybe he was not fully aware of it himself.

The necessary change in society is to take the control of information away from huge compaines and states and give it back to the people who owns it, or the world is likely to look exactly as William Gibson described it in "Neuromancer". Therefore, we call ourselves cyberpunks. We are outlaws, wired up and connected. We will bring the new era. To us, information electronics is not a symbol of status or a way to earn money and respect, but an extension of the human mind. That is why Timothy Leary called the PC the LSD of the 90's - computers seem to widen peoples' views quite a bit.

We do not want to steal from the companies. Hell no. We just want our citizen rights back. If I got a piece of information, I want to have the right to copy it. If you try to stop me, I will bite for sure. Don't you touch my privacy! Get out of my life!

My ideology burns for me like a lamp in the light. This is not an ideology of Liberalism, nor Socialism, Conservatism, Communism or any of these ideologies you know from school. This one is called Cyberpunk.

Those syndicates popping up around the globe, those pirates earning heaps of money from selling games to poor computerfreaks, thus making themselves a living as parasites of our society, THOSE you can hunt down and kill if you like. Noone will miss them. BUT DO NOT TOUCH THE CRACKERS AND SWAPPERS, for those are not your enemies. A real cyberpunk would never charge for information. He only swap, and I regard it his right to do so. Some may not.

I do not want to destroy. I want to create.

Thus spake King Fisher

[hyper4pyropixie]

That is an interesting article.

I agree about infomation should be free, but i disaree about killing the pritates. Sure they are making a lot of money off of that infomation, but it is hard to at times whether a person is a "cracker" or a "priate"

[palla]

Wow, this person is a smart cookie, at least in the part where he points out how information ought to be free. I totally agree with him and with Pix ("killing the pirates").

[BugHunter]

I think the author of this article is stupid . He has no conscience and he's really only thinking about himself.

[Deimos]

I think he makes a pretty good argument-
information doesn't "belong" to any one person

and Pix: I think it goes like this-
pirates- copy and sell for cash
crackers- copy and share NOT for cash

I think so...

but nonetheless, I won't dismiss his points, as a matter of fact, I could almost agree

[BugHunter]

That cash pays people for their labor. This person does not think of the people he's affecting with this idea. Its no different than stealing. But this is probably idealism i speak of. But it still doesn't make this person right.

[Cobra5]

The Conscience of a Cracker
by William De Schryver

They say a Nihilist is a person who deny common values. This is not the whole truth. A Nihilist is a person who denies certain values and builds new values. A person who just deny common values and wants to kick and destroy society is rather an Renegade or plain Vandal, a prophet of non-values. Myself I prefer to call myself an adherer of the Zen-philosophy, the Fallibilism, or simply: a person who believes there are no such fixed entities as "good", "evil" or "private property", but they are all mere constructions of the human mind. I am a follower of Nietzsche in some sense, but I want to reach beyond Nietzsche since Nihilism is always creative.

They say crackers are evil bugs who just wants to rip off software companies and steal every penny out of the pockets of poor programmers. Myself I would say: "Information is free, just like the air, and noone has the right to build walls around it". If you thought crackers were just another bunch of raging Renegades wanting to tear down and destroy everything just for the fun of it, you are dead wrong. We are infact worse than that.

We tear down, yes, but we are proud of it, and we do it because we have to. Someone has to set freedom to this information. I crack not because I hate society, but because I love it and want to evolve it. I consider cracking a highly political action, and I most certainly think it is RIGHT to crack.

Now you are confused. Let me explain once again.

This year, 1995, I can walk into any public library, take out ANY book, go to the photocopier and make a copy of every page of it if I like. This is all perfectly legal, atleast here in Sweden. The Swedish state (and many other states as well) have decided it is every citizens right to copy book pages if s/he wants to.

Now, I walk home. I look on my CD-player. I am not allowed to copy any of my CD's to tape if I wish. It is illegal. I look on my videotapes. I am not allowed to copy them. It is illegal. I look on my diskboxes containing some Microsoft software I once bought. I am not allowed to copy these disks either. Well, I might make copies for safety reasons, but not to give away to friends. It is illegal.

This makes me sick! What's the difference between Software, CD's, Videotapes and the Books at my public library? It's all information, heavens sake! The problem in this case is not the information itself. The problem is that this society hardwired my brain to believe information could be owned, just like land or money, or like the Greek or the Cotton Farmers in southern America once believed PEOPLE could be owned, and called it slavery. I realize I am a slave of the information-controlling society. Because that is what it is all about. Control. Complete and utter total control.

I am not telling you I want chaos to replace copyright regulations. If I wanted chaos I would be a destructive beast and not a constructive citizen. I love our society, and I think it is one of the best things about the world there is. The cyberspace communities like the Scene or Usenet, I love even more since they are international and multi-cultural. That is why I want to tell society there is something wrong, I want to blow the whistle while there is still time.

I do not dislike or hate software companies. In fact, I want software comanies. I rather dislike the social structure and economic therms that both people and companies are bound by, and have to obey. I believe both companies and citizens to be prisoners of the economic system. You say someone has to pay. Why? What is this "pay" anyway? What is "owned knowledge" and "public knowledge"? Or to use the vocabulary of authority itself: What is this bogus thing called "Intellectual property" you make so much noise about? Which information am I allowed to own? Which information am I allowed to carry in my head?

To the people of the post-modern society economics, ownership and right to information is a religion. They adhere to economic gods and think they will be redempted the day they become yuppies in suits and ties, that the guy owning the most cars and electronic gadgets when he dies will win the game. My god how I hate these semi-gods. Information is all there is, yuppieheads. Perhaps William Gibson was the first to realize this in 1982. Yet very few people have understood what he really meant. Maybe he was not fully aware of it himself.

The necessary change in society is to take the control of information away from huge compaines and states and give it back to the people who owns it, or the world is likely to look exactly as William Gibson described it in "Neuromancer". Therefore, we call ourselves cyberpunks. We are outlaws, wired up and connected. We will bring the new era. To us, information electronics is not a symbol of status or a way to earn money and respect, but an extension of the human mind. That is why Timothy Leary called the PC the LSD of the 90's - computers seem to widen peoples' views quite a bit.

We do not want to steal from the companies. Hell no. We just want our citizen rights back. If I got a piece of information, I want to have the right to copy it. If you try to stop me, I will bite for sure. Don't you touch my privacy! Get out of my life!

My ideology burns for me like a lamp in the light. This is not an ideology of Liberalism, nor Socialism, Conservatism, Communism or any of these ideologies you know from school. This one is called Cyberpunk.

Those syndicates popping up around the globe, those pirates earning heaps of money from selling games to poor computerfreaks, thus making themselves a living as parasites of our society, THOSE you can hunt down and kill if you like. Noone will miss them. BUT DO NOT TOUCH THE CRACKERS AND SWAPPERS, for those are not your enemies. A real cyberpunk would never charge for information. He only swap, and I regard it his right to do so. Some may not.

I do not want to destroy. I want to create.

Thus spake William De Schryver





I rest my case. Information can and should belong to people. It isn't fair otherwise.

Oh, and how can you possabily say that authors and poets and game designers and musicians and artists and anyone else who dosn't directly produce material objects for a living dosn't deserve to be paid for their work? Dosn't deserve to take credit? Dosn't derserve recongnition?

This article is not only poorly thought out, it has some wrong facts as well. He says you can walk up to any library and take any book out, and you should be able to do the same with other forms of information. This however, isn't true. You can't go to a library and just take any book out- you can only take books which are no longer making profits. New books... you have to buy those. That's what book stores are for. Old books you can get for free... just like old games, and old music.

In short: He's wrong on numorous acounts and his ideals would, indeed, despite his claims to the otherwise, bring about anarchy. When no-one owns anything, everyone else steals it. So people stop making it. And that's anarchy.

[palla]

Cobra5 said:

He says you can walk up to any library and take any book out, and you should be able to do the same with other forms of information. This however, isn't true. You can't go to a library and just take any book out- you can only take books which are no longer making profits. New books... you have to buy those. That's what book stores are for. Old books you can get for free... just like old games, and old music

What kind of tiem limit are you putting on "old books"? There are plenty of books in libraries that are "new" and you can easily borrow them (HP books, for example).

[Cobra5]

Its not really the emphisis of my argument. My emphisis is that by infringing copyrights you are really screwing over a lot of inocent people, and robbing credit from where credit is due.

And by new books I mean books that are... well... new. Er... nevermind. Its not really important.

[BugHunter]

Yes, Amen, Damn straight! Will, there are some times where i may hate you, but right now I love ya! Will is speaking complete sense! That whole post was perfect! Well done, amigo!

[palla]

I found this poem in the lookup of a fellow deviant (Al will know what that means). I thought it was beautiful and I want to share it with all of you:

Dicen que soñar es gratis,
sin saber cuanto se equivocan;
pues el precio más caro que en el mundo
hay que pagar,es el de tener que despertar.

Dicen que soñar es gratis,
y yo les contradigo:
el dolor es gratis,el sufrimiento un regalo,
la pena siempre es una oferta,pero soñ ar...
Soñar es caer después de volar,
morir nada más nacer,
un golpe después de un beso,
maldición tras bendición,
soledad tras compañia,
odio tras amor.
Soñar es darte cuenta de lo solo que estas,
si la vida entera fuera soñar...!
Pero tan solo un sueño eterno hay,y ese es la muerte...
Si la vida es un sueño,la muerte es el despertar.
En mi ya esta amaneciendo.

------------------
------------------

They say that to dream is free,
without knowing how much they evoke with it;
well the price is more costly than the world
has to pay, it is that which they have to awaken.

They say that to dream is free,
and they contradict themselves:
sorrow is free, suffering a gift,
grief always is an offering, but to sleep...
To dream is to fall after flying,
to die is nothing more than being born,
a beating after a kiss,
damnation after benediction,
solitude after company
hatred after love.
To dream is to give you reckoning of how lonely you are,
if life is acquainted outside of dreaming...!
But loneliest of all is an everlasting dream, and that is death...
If life is a dream, them dying is to wake up.
In myself it is already dawning.

[Cobra5]

Uhh... I don't like it at all, actually...

I could give all my reasons but I know heather dosn't care.

[palla]

I hate it when you say that. What do you honestly think?

[Cobra5]

Well, it lacks.... everything.


I mean, its main message is "I wish I was dead". That's real deep.

Looking a little more in to it, all the person is saying is "My dreams won't come true, so I wish I was dead". That's just immature and stupid. That's how everybody's life is, and if you can't deal with it, it's your own damn fault, so get over yourself and toughen up.

Then they add a whole bunch of fluff text, which tries to make it seem more pleasing, but dosn't really add any meaning to the poem.

To its credit, the poem does begin to touch on the more mature subject of desire and dissapointment. It begins to say that the only reward of dreaming is to be unfulfilled, but before it gets to explore this a little more it totally drops down to the whole "I wish I was dead" stuff and loses most of its deeper meanings.