Bruce Sterling interviewed by Shapeways


22 Responses to “Bruce Sterling interviewed by Shapeways”

  1. SamSam says:

    He didn’t sound grumpy to me, just annoyed at the stupid-ass questions. I mean, really, they weren’t very good. I think the interviewer was just trying to show how funny he was.

  2. maoinhibitor says:

    If you’re going to interview Bruce Sterling, send your best interviewer and make him bring his A-game!

    Geebus, I’ve seen more intelligent interview questions from 80-s era DIY fanzines edited by 13 year olds.

  3. TheAmazingYeah says:

    @Rob – Bruce spoke to my Literature and Globalization class at North Carolina State about 10 years ago. It was maybe 15 students and a professor, 3 of us who knew who he was and had read anything other than the required reading – Globalhead – and he was still a teddy bear. Not nearly as grumpy in person as he is in his writings. Except when you fawn over him like I did.

  4. Anonymous says:

    sterling is such a pessimist. read our great writer of genius= walker percy’s ‘love in the ruins’ and see where sterling stole his ideas for distraction’

  5. Anonymous says:

    Well…that was fairly awesome.

  6. Pantograph says:

    What’s with all the interviews Shapeways? Get printing!

  7. Frank W says:

    Q: What will the future be like?
    A: Like the present, duh.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Not valid to categorize Sterling as grumpy when he has to put up with such poor questions.

  9. Rob says:

    I love me some Sterling, but is no one else tired and exhausted from the relentlessly grumpy and cynical grim meathook future? Honestly?

  10. zikman says:

    what a pedant.

  11. Flying_Monkey says:

    I think if I had to put up with idiot questions like that, I’d be grumpy to!

  12. daneyul says:

    >>> You mean besides “smallpox blankets?”

    Since there’s absolutely no evidence or documentation of smallpox infected blankets ever being given to American Indians, the answer should have been: No, I mean a “non-urban legend” prank disease.

      • daneyul says:

        Dude, Cecil is always in my fact check list. Did you even read his article?

        Again, absolutely no evidence or documentation of smallpox infected blankets ever being given to American Indians exists–postscripts in a couple of letters between Bouquet and Amherst is not evidence. (Neither is smallpox breaking out nearby–in the mid-1700′s, smallpox was rampant throughout the native population.

        In all the correspondence, both military and personal, we have from that time period (and there’s a goodly amount) this is all we got–two postscripts indicated desire and vague intent. But nothing else, ever, to indicate it actually transpired. (And don’t even try with taking the diary of William Trent out of context).

        May have happened. No proof or account of it happening. Shouldn’t be assumed to have happened.

    • lysdexia says:

      If only Joris had had the foresight to be carrying a Jaccizi stim disguised as a sheep’s bladder, the interview might have turned out more interesting.

  13. Day Vexx says:

    I’m waiting for Part 2, where Sterling snaps and kicks a chump interviewer in the teeth.

  14. OneAmp says:

    “Mr. Sterling, if you were a salad dressing, which one would you be?”

    Shapeways needs to stick to the printing.

  15. dculberson says:

    I can’t even figure out what they meant by the “speak quicker” question. Like, if you can speak quickly you get what you want that much sooner? I don’t know. To me it reads kind of like, “If everyone had oranges, do you think the people with denim pants would be happier?”

    • Pantograph says:

      Yeah. I also don’t agree with the answer. People who talk loudly into cellphones are more happy. For one thing they aren’t bothered by the loud ass talking on a cellphone.

  16. Faustus says:


    Yeah, you got it. The idea being that currently one point of view about things is that the more you have of them the more happy you’ll be, the greater GDP = always good version of life.

    So if we all had cheap replicators who would be the most happy? Well according to our previous theory it would be the person who could get more things, and more quickly once he’d thought of something to get. Hence it would be the person who could speak more quickly to his replicator.

    The converse is that those who could only speak slowly would be unhappier, because they’d always have their things after the quick speakers. Poor, poor Morgan Freeman.

Leave a Reply