resonating to the realization of a nother way to live. ie: to get back to living. if our interconnect edness is key then a www/net to orchestrate the chaos as we emerge from past toxin buildup from supposed-to ness et al, might just be simple enough to set us all free. ie: listening to the whimsy/curio sity already in each person for direction. aka: good-bye bureaucracy; good-bye cycle. redefineschool.com/vision-versions/
deck/convo inspired while reading Tim Berners-Lee’s weaving the web. summed up in his quote from the internet’s own boy (above). and (re-visiting) Amanda Palmer’s, the art of asking. because Anthony. and David Graeber’s, the theory of value, et al. all light
tan, italicized, this size print, are quotes from Tim’s book. all light red, italicized, this size print , are quotes from Amanda’s book. all light blue, italicized, this size print , are quotes from David.
and of course.. ongoingly.. inspired by a kazillion others. forever the voices in my head. all represented (but not limited to) the white space(s).
‘ ‘ ‘
unless..
unless
s..
which we don’t have yet.. we don’t have the whole planet on board. even though we have the means for 7 billion plus to have been connected by now..
In an extreme view, the world can be seen as only connections, nothing else. We think of a dictionary as the repository of meaning, but it defines words only in terms of other words. I liked the idea that a piece of information is really defined only by what it’s related to, and how it’s related. There really is little else to meaning.
The structure is everything. There are billions of neurons in our brains, but what are neurons? Just cells. The brain has no knowledge until connections are made between neurons. All that we know, all that we are, comes from the way our neurons are connected…
which i guess is fine for now..(that the whole world isn’t yet connected), because perhaps having everyone on board…
isn’t enough..
perhaps we also need for everyone to be free enough to
be themselves.
Her lab is a love affair with her art. On the dire consequences when robots steal our jobs: If there’s ever a sign that a society is designed stupidly it’s that the prospect of manual labor being eliminated is a problem. If we don’t know what to do with freedom and liberty.. that’s pretty messed up. Huge swaths of people, in Europe & North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they believe to be unnecessary. Managers kept telling me to stop twittering and get back to work. I broke up with a lot of managers. They didn’t understand. that was the work.
(w/ukelele and twitter) – I felt like I was in control of my life again. I had missed the freedom of the street. What is possible on the sidewalk is unique. No song needed, no words, no lighting, no story, no ticket,
no critic, no context.
otherwise we have bored/tired/sad/depressed/busy/mad/angry/greedy/
oppressed… people. and people without their basic needs met.. (aka: involved in and/or causing some illness/war/policy/coercion/debt/crime/ somewhere/anywhere/everywhere..
) often end up
violence…
What, precisely, does it mean to say that our sense of morality and justice is reduced to the language of a business deal?…... money’s capacity to turn morality into a matter of impersonal arithmetic.. to justify things that would otherwise seem outrageous or obscene. When one looks a little closer, one discovers that these two elements – the violence and the quantification – are intimately linked. The way violence, or threat of violence, turns human relations into mathematics.
and then we need rules‌ lots of rules. rules enough to make bureaucratic soup. to keep us in it. safe. but not alive. I would have to create a system with common rules that would be acceptable to everyone. This meant as close as possible to no rules at all. This notion seemed impossible until I realized that the diversity of different computer systems and networks could be a rich resource – something to be represented, not a problem to be eradicated. The model I chose for my minimalist system was hypertext.
which perpetuates our not being ourselves.
Structural violence, by which I mean forms of pervasive social inequality that are ultimately backed up by the threat of physical harm....invariably tend to create the kinds of willful blindness we normally associate with bureaucratic procedures.
perhaps we try something different. perhaps tech can help hypertext us. unbottleneck us. back to us.
This (hypertext) allows us to drop the requirement that two people have same rigid idea of what something "is.” To maximize unexpected breakthroughs: get a bunch of people; give them resources they need; leave them alone. Most will end up with nothing, but a few will come up with something that will even surprise themselves. To minimize unexpected breakthroughs: take same people; tell them they won’t get any resources at all unless they spend the majority of their time competing with one another to prove to you that they already know what they’re going to create.
If the Web was to be a universal resource, it had to be able to grow in an unlimited way. Technically, if there was any centralized point of control, it would rapidly become a bottleneck that restricted the Web’s growth, and the Web would never scale up. Its being “out of control” was very important.
No one can be aware of everything on the internet, and that blocking access to any one bit of it is an exercise in futility.
- Neil Gershenfeld
We seem as humans to be tuned so that we do in the end get the most fun out of doing the "right" thing. You’ll never ever be able to convince a person through logical argument or even brilliant rhetoric that a free and just society is possible. You can show them. You can start doing it.
something different.. where
have the luxury of..
perhaps our being “out of control� is very important.
device (chip/whatever flavor) & wifi (juice/whatever form) for everyone. simple enough that we could ground/orchestrate the chaos of 7 billion people set free.. today. every day. as the day. ie: redefineschool.com/a-nother-way-book/
unless
s..
to be that free (100%)… that wide (7 billion plus)… means…
cha o s To allow group intuition, the Web would capture half thoughts that arise, without evident rational thought or inference, as we work. capture half thoughts that a r i s e Bourdieu: A truly artful By linking things together we can go a very long way toward creating common understanding. social actor is almost The Web’s universality leads to a thriving richness and diversity. If a company claims to give guaranteed access to the world of information, then presents a filtered view, the Web loses its credibility. not to be ie: facebook is the web; america is the world able to offer a clear explanation of the principles underlying her own artistry.
David Graeber writes in (ch3) of bureaucracy, of a common misunderstanding about Jo Freeman’s tyranny of structurelessness. ie (paraphrase – and perhaps my misinterpretation): as she wrote about groups past the size of 20ish losing it – to chaos. he says she wasn’t pushing for transparent hierarchy, but rather a mechanism to ensure equity in that structurelessness. so.. the need for a mechanism. that perpetuates self-organizing/regeneration/deep-listening.. a starting over ness (at minimum) everyday..
Although I knew I would be forced to introduce some structure, I wanted the consortium to operate in a way that reflected a weblike existence. The Web would not be an isolated tool used by people in their lives, or even a mirror of real life; it would be part of the very fabric of the Web of life we all help weave.
perhaps our biggest roadblock.. not trusting all of us. feeling the need to police/quiet/direct some of us.. et al. afraid of the chaos.. the “out of control” ness. I’m often asked: How can you trust people so much? Because that’s the only way it works. Seeing each other is hard. But I think when we truly see each other, we want to help each other. I think human beings are fundamentally generous, but our instinct to be generous gets broken down. Most of us are accustomed to describe things as “realities” precisely because we can’t completely understand them, can’t completely control them, don’t know exactly how they are going to affect us, but nonetheless can’t just wish them away. It’s what we don’t know about them that brings home the fact that they are real. What ultimately lies behind the appeal of bureaucracy is fear of play.
perhaps the structureless structure we’ve been missing is a means to listen to all of us. (deep-address/stack-ness/ni-ness) and none of us (echo chamber-ness). a means to be in public.. and still to hide.
As art returns to the commons and becomes more and more digital, uncaged, freely shareable, we need to figure out how people sustain a new artistic ecosystem…. even the perfect tools aren’t going to help us if we can’t face one another. If we can’t see one another. Your acceptance of the gift is the gift…. the gift must always move. I/you/we are bigger on the inside…. than another one can ever see.
perhaps tech can help us with this dance. with it’s ability to listen without an agenda (some app/chip), and then connect us per our choice. freeing us from the busy ness that currently consumes us, ie: proving/hoop-jumping/form-filling/pitching/judging..
When you’re afraid of someone’s judgment, you can’t conn
ect with them. You’re too preoccupied with the task of impressing them.
I’d learned that it was pointless trying to tell these people what their music had meant to me. It meant everything. Their songs were the landscape of my inner life. I was modeling my own style of songwriting after theirs. It would just sound trite if I tried to explain it out loud. .. but I could make them eggs.
in the city. as the day.
How do we create a world in which people don’t think of art just as product, but as relationship?
if we’re quiet we can hear two needs (attachment & authenticity). deep (wide) enough that 7 billion people would resonate with so we could focus on. to simplify the day. today. every day. as the day.
unless
s..
Perhaps a linked information system will allow us to see the real structure of …(us.)
because we already are intercon
(the Web) brings the workings of society closer to the workings of our minds…… A computer typically keeps information in rigid hierarchies and matrices, whereas the human mind has the special ability to link random bits of data….. ..handling the chaos and giving us new ways to see..
handling the chaos… giving us new ways to see.
nnected.
The system had to have one other fundamental property: it had to be completely decentralized. That would be the only way a new person somewhere could start to use it without asking for access from anyone else. And that would be the only way the system could scale, so that as more people used it it wouldn’t get bogged down.
the-dance won’t dance unless
all of us are free‌
We seem to have built into us what it takes in a person to be part of a fractal society.
The way of creating society.. was through establishing long-term open-ended commitme
Value is not created in that public recognition. rather, what is being recognized is something that was, in a sense,
se, already there.
Looking at a thing, according to Ong, is always looking at a mere fraction of a thing, and the viewer is always at least vaguely aware that there is something further underneath.
It cannot get any simpler than a painted person on a box, a living human question mark, asking: love? And a passing stranger, rattled out of the rhythm of a mundane existence, answering: yes. love.
(Mauss was)Trying to get at the heart of precisely what it was about the logic of the market that did such violence to ordinary people’s sense of justice and humanity. redefineschool.com/rewire-ds-ni-ic/
some space/place (perhaps a city) that hosts all kinds/flavors of people. open enough to model (fractal ish) 7 billion people dancing the dance (aka: in sync) today. every day. as the day.
‘ ‘ ‘
unless
s..
the web needs the whole world. the world needs the whole web. so that all of us can be each of us. together.
i am a dreamer. but i’m not the only one.