This makes such an interesting case. There a number of concepts so original and unique that they haven't been included "as a single word" in the conversations that are likely to determine what is considered relevant in world culture. There are cultural patterns that we simply don't have words for. Unless we create a truly universally granular language, that is: `Q: What is your favourite word? A: “Thing”, apparently. The harder I’m writing, the more imprecise my spoken language becomes.`
I'm more of a Rudy Rucker guy. Gibson was always so cynical, whereas Rucker liked to use the serendipitous nature of the universe to make things right.<p>It's funny to me that someone like Gibson, that has fought authoritarians his whole life, would be so willing to "redistribute wealth", whatever that means.<p>I have to say though, this fact blew me away:<p>"<i>What or who is the greatest love of your life?
My wife of 45 years, Deborah.</i>"<p>Maybe I'm completely off about his cynicism.
Just a 2 cent tip: For interviews, it helps to respond to their answers. Feels more like a conversation. I realize it's easy to email 20 questions and call it a day. Been there, done that. In my experience, if you ask three questions you get as much content as asking ten questions and the individual answers are more interesting as a result. Your mileage may vary ;-)