rtf@ihuxw.UUCP (07/14/83)
Lauren, I won't even begin to argue every point in your latest article but I do disagree with your statement that no "alternative" was presented to nuclear war. I believe the message was quite clear at the end of the movie when "joshua" said: "... a strange game, the only winning move is not to play." This means, if you want to win a nuclear war, don't have one. Sparrow p.s. I know I have poured gasoline on the fire!
lauren%LBL-CSAM@vortex.UUCP (07/16/83)
From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM>
This is the fun part, where I basically get to just sit back and
watch the flaming packets fly while chuckling softly to myself.
Isn't it amazing how these discussions take on a life of their own?
It appears that almost everyone is in agreement on a few basic points:
1) Nuclear war is bad. Golly gee, Mr. Wizard! I guess we all really
needed "Wargames" to convince us of that. The person who said that
the message was "driven home with a sledgehammer" certainly hit the,
uh, "nail on the head" (no pun intended) with that one. I don't recall
any "alternative" solutions being presented by the film, however.
No doubt after seeing the movie all sides will immediately disarm, right?
Yeah, sure... The "anti-nuclear" portion of the movie's message
was about as intelligently executed as the "anti-drug" messages of
"Dragnet" back in the late sixties (a program which still wins my award
for one of the overall most humorous programs ever produced...)
Doper: "He just kept saying he wanted to get FARTHER OUT,
FARTHER OUT..."
Sgt. Friday: "Well, he made it. He's dead."
2) "Wargames" is technically (in terms of real-world representation)
flawed in a myriad number of ways. Specific arguments about
phones and missiles and such are probably beside the point -- clearly
the producers were not in the least bit interested in accuracy, so
long as enough "genuine" concepts were thrown in that the audience
had some well-known points of reference (e.g. a high school hacker).
By the way, my sources have told me that at one point during
pre-production, the producers apparently *were* trying to get specific
information from at least some persons who understand the realities
of the technology in question. I'm also informed that as soon as
the producers didn't hear the sorts of answers they "wanted", they simply
ignored the "consultants" and went ahead with the fairy tale...
Unfortunately, the real world situation just wasn't exciting enough
for them or their intended audience. Oh well, as long as they're
willing to shell out their five bucks...
3) Part of the message of "Wargames" was specifically about computers,
not about nuclear war. As was nicely pointed out by another
person in the digest, it is this portion of the message which was
the most seriously mangled by the film. Since the film was released,
I've been semi-systematically asking intelligent people who do NOT
work frequently with computers what they thought about the message
of "Wargames". THEY are the ones saying that the message was
"Computers are bad." Remember, virtually everyone reading
this digest is already computer "literate". We know where the
fantasy ends and the reality begins. We thusly tend to view the
film differently from the person who really doesn't know the first
thing about computers (or, for that matter, about missile control
systems or military communications networks). We laugh and groan
at the silliness in the movie -- but there are other INTELLIGENT
people out there who don't know any better and are believing much of that
stuff. Sure, they think it might be over-dramatized a little, but by and
large they figure that it can't be far off the mark.
I saw a similar situation years ago when I surveyed people regarding
voice-input systems. I asked them if they thought that, somewhere,
there was a machine that could understand unrestricted English spoken
by anyone without training, and whether or not they thought that
"voice-typewriters" existed. A majority said, "Sure! Of course."
"What makes you think so?" I asked. "Well, I've seen them all the
time in the movies -- like HAL in 2001!" "Uh, then why don't we
see them in use?" I inquired. "The government is hiding them so
that secretaries aren't thrown out of work, or (other reasons to
hide them)." Damn it, the large number of people who answered in this
sort of manner was ridiculous. The "masses", by and large, just
don't know the difference between fantasy and reality when it comes
to technology.
I'm not going to try defend "The Forbin Project" or "Demon Seed". Both
were laughable. "Wargames" is causing much more confusion, however,
since it threw in little "pieces" of technological reality with which
people could identify, then proceeded onward to obscure the meaningful
technological message within almost pure fantasy. I've already seen numerous
stories about reporters running around (based on nothing more than
the film) hassling NORAD about whether or not "Wargames" was "accurate".
Remember, *we* know the dividing line between the fantasy and reality
in this area, but *most* people, including reviewers, many reporters,
and, yes, many (most?) of our elected representatives, do *not*.
And now, I retire to the digital limbo from which I came, to sit
back and watch as more flames fly... Ta ta for now.
--Lauren--
P.S. Oh yeah, regarding that "311" area code business. The code
"311" was, for years, the generic "sample" area code used
by most telcos in advertisements or other places where they
needed to show phones with phone numbers. The most frequently
seen number (used by Bell System) was (311) 555-2368.
General Telephone, just to be "different", used (311) KL-5-2368.
Chuckle.
--LW--