This got me thinking about the internet as landscape, or open space within network infrastructure. The internet was once a wilderness, but has been over-developed, and because of this we’ve lost areas to simply exist. Tools for sharing photos have turned into platforms for sharing things that more closely resemble personal ads. Tools for communicating with friends are used to extract taste profiles and create filter bubbles to encourage constant consumption and endless engagement. I wonder what a conservationist movement for the open web could look like
So, could it be possible to organise our networked devices, embedded as they are in a capitalist economy, in an anti-capitalist way?
For us to be capable of resisting, we must become the forest – and resist like the forest, the forest that knows it carries ruins within itself, that carries within itself both what it is and what it no longer is. We must lend shape to this political, affective feeling in order to lend meaning to our actions. This means shifting a few tectonic plates in our own thinking. We have to decolonise ourselves.
Focus on critical connections more than critical mass—build the resilience by building the relationships.
It is about allowing people to communicate, read, organize and come up with better ways of doing things, sharing experiences across borders, without scrutiny or engineering, a kind of cyberpunk internationalism.
Facilitate the modelling of thought and reality with software. The reality of all that exists, has existed, and might exist in the future; it's meaning, interpretation, and interconnections - these are the objects and concepts to focus on. These should influence the data structures, not the other way around. We need to go beyond the mere imitation of paper in our software design.
Everything Must be editable, quotable, annotatable - all the time by everyone. This is not optional. It must, however, be clear what has been modified, and who made the revisions.
The same information can be structured-viewed-formatted in various ways. Simultaneously having multiple dimensions and views. Potentially infinite dimensions will allow the same data to be included in vast numbers of sets, lists, and structures. Each user can have many unique personal dimensions linking all the documents they have ever accessed. They will be able to view these dimensions on any Internet connected computer, thus in effect, allowing their complete personal computing environments to follow them to any available screen in the world. By following along their personal time dimension from past through future, it provides a simple chronological organizing structure. You could even have a dimension linking all your favorite dimensions created by others. The real world will be one of the transparent overlays, it will be that other reality. It will be the strongly predominant display in mission critical situations, such as driving and close encounters with loved ones.
Transclusion - (cloning, see-thru links). These allow quoting anything without losing the connection to the original document. This refers to a compound document where the viewer sees what appears to be a single work, but is in fact seeing parts of several works. This is not cut and pasted together, but seeing parts of several "pages", as if they were stacked transparent overlays.
Easy royalty payments. Necessary if you want all the world's libraries and copyrighted media to potentially be available everywhere. Transclusions facilitate this.
All versions accessible, comparable side-by-side, with changes, deletions, and additions made visible between any two or more versions.
Persistent, unbreakable 2-way links. This means that renaming files and directories and changing servers will have no effect on links and addresses. Links can be to and from points, spans (sentences, phrases, chapters, video segments, etc.), and documents. There will also be many author and reader defineable link types: comment, addition, disagreement, correction, outlines, and versions.
A permanent data store. This makes it all possible. Everything gets an unchangeable storage location (automatically encrypted and backed-up in several locations). All documents, versions, and transclusions refer to this for content.
Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a structureless group. Any group of people of whatever nature that comes together for any length of time for any purpose will inevitably structure itself in some fashion. The structure may be flexible; it may vary over time; it may evenly or unevenly distribute tasks, power and resources over the members of the group. But it will be formed regardless of the abilities, personalities, or intentions of the people involved. The very fact that we are individuals, with different talents, predispositions, and backgrounds makes this inevitable. Only if we refused to relate or interact on any basis whatsoever could we approximate structurelessness -- and that is not the nature of a human group.
What I want to invite people to do is to say: “Look at the protocol of how you act”—and of course the protocol can be a technical thing, or it could be a non-technical thing—and say, “How do we make this somewhat better?” And better for me always comes down to more cooperative structures, it comes down to equitable distribution of resources and of wealth.
I think one thing we could jettison is this concept of independence. It’s not that helpful. In many ways, the meme of independence won. Now everyone is individuated, and independently free to compete with one another to sell their time and wares on the platforms, and the reality of that is a pretty precarious and unfulfilling existence for most. When everyone is independent, it turns out that we don’t have much collective bargaining power to influence anything all, or at least those with the most wealth or resources will dominate.
Profound friendship is a form of love. It's finding ways of being in each other's lives without feeling attached, unbound to classifications and qualifiers. I appreciate fluid senses of belonging and being in the presence of others. This type of friendship is possible when people think of each other with deep kindness and treat each other gently, forgiving each others mistakes and always thinking of their best intentions. There's a common misunderstanding that love is about finding someone, that you need someone to be in love. I think that's not true. Loving yourself as you are, is always the most fundamental lesson to learn from a relationship.
Oliver Grau’s suggestion that the spectator of a computer screen is in fact in three different places at the same time: the spatiotemporal location of the viewer’s body, the teleperception of the simulated space, and teleaction that happens when one manipulates a robot’s actions with one’s own movements. This multiplicity—or more specifically, this simultaneity—of being present in multiple realities suggests that the key issue here is reality and how it is defined, staged, and refined. It is not merely the simple binary of real versus virtual, but rather the kind of vibrating virtuality that is unconcealed precisely by the juxtaposition