Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

4 Essays this week! Much to chew on, come when you are ready.

Will just jot my way through bits that impacted me, many of which I’ve absorbed all the way into my soul:

{{{+++___

....................

THE MUSEUM OF ME (1998)

disintermediation: such a charged word! So intimately familiar in our modern reality, as a positive and negative spectre.

The positive: allowing anyone to participate, increasing accessibility, removing the price gouging middlemen who step in between the seller and buyer. What value doth your intermediation offer, ticketmaster!? Car salesmen?! Do we need you!??!?!

The negative: ouughghahghgh maybe those human curators had some value

“Removal of the intermediary. All those who stand in the middle of a transaction, whether financial or intellectual: out! Brokers and agents and middlemen of every description: goodbye! Travel agents, real-estate agents, insurance agents, stockbrokers, mortgage brokers, consolidators, and jobbers—all the scrappy percentniks who troll the bywaters of capitalist exchange—who needs you? All those hard-striving immigrants climbing their way into the lower middle class through the penny-ante deals of capitalism, the transfer points too small for the big guys to worry about—find yourself some other way to make a living. Small retailers and store clerks, salespeople of every kind—a hindrance, idiots not to be trusted. Even the professional handlers of intellectual goods, anyone who sifts through information, books, paintings, knowledge, selecting and summing up—librarians, book reviewers, curators, disk jockeys, teachers, editors, analysts—why trust anyone but yourself to make judgements about what is more of less interesting, valuable, authentic, or worthy of your attention? No one, no professional interloper, is supposed to come between you and your desires, which according to this idea, are nuanced, difficult to communicate, irreducible, and, most of all, unique.” (86)

Prophecies all over the place, from the advent of internet decision paralysis to echo chamber polarization to the removal of human beings from service positions for the middle/lower classes.

"The lure of personal service that was dangled before the middle classes, momentarily making us all feel almost as lucky as the rich, is being withdrawn. In the internet age, under the pressure of globalized capitalism and its slimmed-down profit margins, only the very wealthy will be served by actual human beings. The rest of us must make do with web pages, and feel happy about it" (87)

"Physical reality—the discomfort and difficulty of abandoning one's normal life—put a natural break on the formation of cults..." (89)

This chapter really synthesizes my interwoven beliefs about art, religion and technology. To me, the belief that "art is subjective" and the technological erasing of "irrational" physical spaces contribute to a profoundly anti-religious impulse that you know best. What you feel can't be argued. It's best if you just sort yourself by your subjective taste without any regard for the reality of Others, who fundamentally have nothing to do with you unless you like them and they agree with you.

"It is a view that depends on the idea that desire is not social, not stimulated by what others want, but generated internally, and that the satisfaction of desires is not dependent upon other persons, organizations, structures, or governments...

No need to care for my neighbour next door when I can stay with my chosen neighbours in the ether, my email friends and the visitors to sites I visit, people who think as I do, who want what I want. No need for messy debate and the whole rigamarole of government with all its creaky, bothersome structures. " (92)

"The internet ideal represents a retreat not only from political life but also from culture—from that tumultuous conversation in which we try to talk to one another about our shared experiences. As members of a culture, we see the same movie, read the same book, hear the same string quartet. Although it is enormously difficult for us to agree on what we might have seen, read, or heard, it is out of that difficult conversation that real culture arises. Whether or not we come to an agreement or understanding, even if some decide that understanding and meaning are impossible, we are still sitting around the same campfire. (92)

... I've noticed that I kinda have a consistent ideology emerging from all my things. Maybe that's a decent goal, to have someone make a 90 minute "The Philosophy of CJ The X" video essay that makes some semblance of useful sense one day. Give me another year

....................

FIBER OPTIC NIGHTS (1999)

Warm hot blooded human heart life anecdoting throughout this one. Loved it but will only share this one quote I have highlighted and this one I have underlined:

"Oh, the exuberance! The joy of internet creation. The excitement of living exactly in the right time, in the center where everything is about to happen" (98)

"...everywhere you can see, hear, feel the madness of rebellion and the narcissism of self-congratulation..." (103)

....................

OFF THE HIGH (2000)

She's in Toronto!!!

Really compelling chronicle of libertarian web builders slowly converting towards social controls as their individualism is seized by corporate technocrats.

"'Libertarians are used to fighting the government,' he said, 'and not corporations...'"

"'I know we don't like regulation where we can avoid it, but...'"

"'We have to make sure that when people go to the internet, they get the internet,' he went on the say, meaning the real net, the true one, the original—whatever that might mean to him, or us.

We must go back to that internet, even if it existed for only a flickering moment, or never existed except in idylls and nostalgia. We must route around the new bad corporate net; or create a superset of it; or an alternative. Or something." (110-111)

....................

TO CATCH A FALLING KNIFE (2002)

I always love a good exposition about the storytelling myth metrics of the stock market.

It drives me a little insane! :]

One of my favourite free lectures in this area is Aswarth Damodaran on company valuation. if you wanna experience a little overture on how "rational" corporate finance is on the highest level go have some fun with that. I remain rather fresh to the fields of business and finance abut this will elucidate how I want to embolden us down here in Goods & Services and critique (understand) the highest corporate realms that are so obscure and inaccessible to us.

Ullman provides just a gorgeous insanely ahead of its time analysis of the technocratic VC funded capitalism that we are swimming in today. fdsjlkdfklslkjfddljksflksdjfklfjdsjklsdfjlkfd

"A new economic order is dawning, a new reality of existence... In the new capitalism of technology, profits do not matter.

All right, maybe profits do matter, but not right now, maybe not for years. What determines if a startup or web company is succeeding is the number of eyeballs looking at the site, the count of unique visitors, of advertising click-throughs. The idea is to bring millions of viewers to the site. Once all those people are assembled, the companies will find a way to "monetize eyeballs"—that is, make money off the assembly and turn a profit.

In the meantime, a web company needs revenue, money to pay salaries and operating expenses. For the startup, the first revenue source is a round of financing from venture capitalists; a year later, there may be a second round; yet a third after more time has gone by....

I spoke with the founder of a startup. I asked him if he had a path to profitability; he did not. I asked if he had a revenue plan; he did. His answer was "Go IPO!" That is, have an initial public offering and reap the millions from the sale of the stock. Another way to look at this transaction is: Get the general public to finance a company with no known path to making money."

SDFLKJKLSHLJDSKJLKDFSJFDHLSKLIDSJKFIODJSHKBJFHIODSUKJFIJ

 I like talking about business (sustainable provision of Goods & Services to people who desire them) because we live in a world where more and more people are forced to be gig workers and entrepreneurs. More people work-at-home employees and more people have multiple careers, sometimes simultaneously. We HAVE to talk about business, how to do it well and in ways that retain our souls as well as the souls of others. It's a reality all of us deal with while we're instagram story-ing about the evils of capitalism. When you're an uber driver or a YouTuber, the platforms that pay us (for all their miraculous benefits) don't give us benefits or paid leave or retirement funds. WE HAVE TO BECOME MORE RESPONSIBLE, FOR OURSELVES AND EACH OTHER.

Don't feel bad for figuring out your business and your finance with dignity!!! This is somethign I want to strongly encourage in my community. Do not despair at the mere fact of earnign a living!

If you're gonna get mad at capitalism, direct that at these high level abstract financial structures that only the rich can afford to play, that either provide zero value, or provide it wildly unsustainably forcing us all into hyperrealities that no one asked for and no one can pay for!!!!!!!!!!

"The Nasdaq was now a market reacting to itself: Stock prices rise; people buy because they want to get into the hot market; all that buying pressure causes stock prices to rise again. Then more people want a piece of the action; stock prices rise yet again. People buy; prices rise; etc. A sobered-up investor had to know this iteration could not continue to infinity." (124)

LHFDJSKFLDHSFKDLSHFDLKJHFAJL

Look at this meme I found that I can't share with anyone normal:

Anyways sorry for a kind of cerebral rant about money, I don't understand this all enough yet to make a useful and true video about it but I am trying and I hope to one day.

Some things are better than other things, at least. Right?

......

ummmm. okay well anyways let me know what you thought of the book

Files

Comments

Chandler Sterling

"This dream of the future said: Technology is different." (pg. 118) "2002: SOMA has gone dark." (pg. 126) The cursor in front of me is blinking. It's the night before the book club post will even be live, but I'm sitting here writing in Notepad because I want to get ahead of it. I don't know if I'll have time tomorrow to think this through. I wonder if this is just another excuse not to finish that script. It's already 22 pages, will I really have the spare time to record myself talking for that long? Does anyone, especially me, want to hear me talk for that long? Maybe it's best to focus on something shorter that I know will get some eyes on it. Instant gratification finds its way into even my most intentional pursuits. The cursor is still just blinking at me like a disinterested cat waiting around for something interesting to happen. I know I want to talk about stories and myth, but what can I say that isn't blindingly obvious or so off topic it becomes useless to the broader context of a book club. I think that if I add enough poignant quotes from the book in the middle of my ranting then maybe it'll tie everything together so I can still consider myself to be at least talking "around" the book. It's been a bit, I should probably put another one here: "Stock markets float in clouds of stories. Numbers and mathematical analysis may be the infrastructure, but narratives surround the market with words, tales, explanations, myths." (pg. 117) I don't like the stock market. I've tried to read books about it because that's what adults do, but the books don't really connect in a useful way. The myth of the market has been exposed too many times to believe in the stories of quick riches and intentionally playing the market. Safe bets are just a diversified savings account, and risky bets are a fanciful casino table sans the free alcohol. I could use a drink if I'm going to stomach any more talk about stocks. The story has gone sour, and I don't think that it will get more appealing to me any time soon. Cryptology becomes Cryptocurrency becomes NFTs becomes AI, but they're all just variations on a theme. Get rich quick. Technology is different. I've worked with some of this technology. The only thing that's different is the characters; the story stays the same. Parabolic rise. Catastrophic fall. Are you the sophisticated investor who catches the wave or the uninformed investor who lines others' pockets with your failed dreams as you're washed away? I don't like this story. Myth is something that most people talk about like it's old. Greek myth, Egyptian myth, Norse myth, etc. All the workings of an older age with older ideas. In an enlightened era such as ours, how could someone possibly believe in beings hiding in the clouds working strange and unknowable feats of power? "Oh, chips, I thought. Computers. Of course. What other subject produces such hyperbole?" (pg. 84) We probably could have come up with a more subtle name than The Cloud for our new myths. Most people probably have a decent idea of what The Cloud really is, but that doesn't make it any less intangible. The abstract nature of a server hiding out in a sea of identical servers which holds a copy of your data for you isn't really that magical, but if all that data is sitting on a cloud, then the stories practically write themselves. We'll always be able to store more data, take more pictures at higher qualities than ever before. The Cloud is always waiting to accept your offerings. No need to sort through it all right now, you can always pay a few more dollars to add more space. The sky seems limitless from down here, how could your cloud ever grow to block out the sun? And they want you to think that it is YOUR cloud. Designed by all those techies to perform impossible feats to make sure anything and everything you might want to keep is stored safely at your beck and call. Surely these people obsessed with making a buck won't find new ways to profit off of all that data you so kindly offered them. "'I want to guarantee [privacy] with physics and mathematics, not with laws.'" (pg. 106 [John Gilmore, founder of the EFF]) Another modern myth is that a concept can be made to be real with enough logic. Science has unlocked the secrets of the universe for human comprehension; now we just have to find the right math proof for privacy, and we'll be all set. Sure privacy is abstract, but so are numbers! I'm sure that one can contain the other if we just try hard enough. It has to be true. What's the alternative? "'The best defense for one's privacy and personal integrity is not cryptography but .'" (pg. 107 [Neal Stephenson, author of Snow Crash and Cryptonomicon]) Social structures - who needs them in this modern world? We built the internet off the backs of the great cyber-libertarians; there is no social structure, only a web of individuals living the best lives the free market can provide. Could you ask for anything more? Would you? "But the web as it has evolved is based on the idea that we do not even want a shared experience." (pgs. 92-93) You have everything at your fingertips now, isn't that the story? Myths used to tell the stories of gods playing with the lives of humans. Now they instruct humans on all the fun new ways you can play with your gods. Use your digital omnipresence to observe what's happening on the other side of the world! Use your cyber-omniscience to find any answer with a few taps of your finger! Use your techno-omnipotence to create wonders with all the new portable applications and gadgets for a nominal monthly fee! You're in control, we're just happy to put you in the seat of power. Enjoy infinity! "'You're being walled in!'" (pg. 99 [a friend of Ullman]) The cursor is still blinking; every single time that I try to stop and think it just blinks at me. "The evidence of my own eyes drives me." (pg. 115) I check the clock and wonder if I'll still have time tonight to work on that script. I stop to think about if I should put it on the back burner for the hundredth time since I started writing it, and the cursor keeps blinking impatiently. The longer I try to untangle the story I've been telling myself, the more the cursor beckons me to write anything to silence it. I keep giving in to the demands. "The energy of the neighborhood tells you this is just the beginning." (pg. 97) I get the sinking feeling that I'm not the sophisticated investor. My mouse hovers over the 'X' as I consider closing the tab and turning in for the night. The cursor blinks at me, unsatisfied as ever. I can almost hear the sound of a wave behind me, ready to crash down and take me away with it.

Josh Foreman

I'd love to see you talk to Unlearning Economics. He's got a great podcast now!

Witchgender

"You're being walled in." The tech mania moving everything in "Fiber Optic Nights" is palpable: the hot and bustling gatherings of programmers and venture capitalists, the buildings springing up to "divide the skyline among themselves like it's loot", the streets that are gouged out to install new fiber optic cables. With the cables comes bandwidth, room, space but only for that which is travelling at the speed of light. We must keep moving "What limits can we not surpass?" The programmer's way of being is catching on as "profits do not matter" starts to sound like "You must not get off the train." Loving this book so far, this is my first book club and I've been enjoying reading everyone else's contributions so I'll try to write a little bit on each thread from now on.

Megan S.

More excellent essays, and more discursive thoughts. I don’t know if we can call what Ullman was doing prophecy, or if the conclusions she reached we inevitable even as she wrote her essays, then again I don’t like the word inevitable, it leave too little room for choice, so maybe its fairer to say that she saw the choices we were making and not making, saw the momentum of the internet in all its terrible glory and extrapolated. THE MUSEUM OF ME (1998) “A democracy, indeed a culture, needs some sustaining common mythos. Yet, in a world where “truth” is a variable concept—where any belief can find its adherents—how can a consensus be formed? How can we arrive at the compromises that must underlie the workings of any successful society?” (pg 93 on the internet archive) I don’t think despair is a useful response to suffering, at least not the kind despair that prevents me from acting, that leads me away from others and into myself. Still, what is to be done? I’ve deleted my social media. I’m trying to form community and prioritize real life relationships. Still..there is that question of can We handle This. It doesn’t feel like We can. It feels too much for our institutions. The solution is probably still to do the difficult work of community building and community work again and again and again…still feels overwhelming to reckon with but I’m guessing that’s how humans have felt since forever. Other people are annoying interlopers. They stand between you and your experience, which is special, unique, for you and only you. Now that we have the web, Ross asserted, we can look at anything we want whenever we want. We no longer need him or his curators. (pg 97 of the internet archive) I wonder if we haven’t done away with curation so much as offload it to algorithms and group-consensus. I’m a library worker, and although I don’t do curation work per-say I do perform readers’ advisory. That feels valuable. That feels like a conversation. It feels like I am performing a service that I have knowledge and expertise in. As part of my job I’ve also tried to use apps like GoodReads and StoryGraph. I know people find these apps useful, but part of me wants to ask: useful for what? For removing friction? For being able to sort books into increasing insular categories? To be able to assign Art a rating on a 5 star scale. I also wonder how this version of curation shapes our conversations about books. For example, on Storygraph when you review a book you can rate it on several scales. The app asks: is the book fast or slow paced, is it plot or character driven, are the characters likeable?? I’m having trouble articulating my exact discomfort with these categories. They feel reductive. More then that, they help to decide what a book is reduced to. It feels like services like Storygraph and Goodreads and Amazon are trying to prevent a scenario in which people read books outside their predetermined preferences, of ever leaving the Literary Museum of You. FIBER OPTIC NIGHTS (1999) “the programmers and bloggers head home; the bar lights click off. It’s still dark for a moment. Then: the movie lights blast on, the monster tractor of a machine grinds its gears, dangles its chains, hooks off the trench plates, clang-crashes them down across the street. It won’t be long now, maybe half an hour: the jackhammering that cracks open the street and the night; a pause for the low men on the job to shovel away the dirt, the quiet interval feeding the hope that it’s all over; then the jackhammers again; the pause; repeat; until first daylight.” I don’t have much to say about this quote, but the prose is so good I wanted to bring it out so that we can all stare at it a little longer. Look at the way she uses sentence length, punctuation, this ebb and flow this movement within the language. It is Very Good. The last sentence in particular captures the desperate feeling of insomnia through its interminability. OFF THE HIGH (2000) “I want to guarantee [privacy] with physics and mathematics, not with laws.” (pg 110 internet archive) There is this theme of ego running throughout the essays, this insistence on denying the other (the messy other who must create messy laws) and the desire to return again and again to the hard, the rational, the masculine. Physics and mathematics will never guarantee our privacy, but isn’t it tempting to imagine they might? “We have to make sure that when people go to the internet, they get the internet,” he went on to say, meaning the real net, the true one, the original —whatever that might mean to him, or to us.” (pg 114) I cannot picture this internet. Not as something whole and all encompassing. Perhaps I’ve caught glimpses of it here, or in my writing communities, or through the bounty of free educational resources. “He said he could foresee a day when workers, doing their jobs from the “convenience” of their home, would be subject to “spot inspections” by their employers; a time when the home was effectively turned into a powerless, occupied zone under the control of “corporate properatarianism,” as he put it, workers becoming the property of the companies they work for, mere objects of surveillance.” pg 117 hgghhhhhhhhhhhhhhgh . TO CATCH A FALLING KNIFE (2002) “ But there is no escaping one’s guts. The air around me is drunken with greed. The rocketing technology stocks create a force field of desire. I am as intoxicated as I was in those fiber optic nights at Infusion, but crazier. I see the startup boys making millions. Why shouldn’t I get into the game of betting on technology riches?” pg 120 I love how Ullman describes the market as an almost physical force, intoxicating and irresistible. I find this a much more honest portrayal then that of a rational numbers game. Oh here's a link to the Internet Archive version in case anyone else had their Libby loan end https://archive.org/details/life-in-code-a-personal-history-of-technology-ellen-ullman-z-lib.org/page/n119/mode/1up

Lou Corben

Part Two The Rise and Fall of the Internet **The Museum of Me** “all the scrappy percentniks who troll the bywaters of capitalist exchange - who needs you?” -Me! I need them! Sometimes I just want to go to the bank and talk to someone who is paid to help me instead of finding the answer myself. Especially because I’m usually pretty good at working things out for myself, and if I’m going to the bank it’s because I couldn’t work it out! So I need help! And then they point you to a machine and say “use that!” I hate it! **Fiber Optic Nights** She makes 1990s San Francisco sound like 1960s Greenwich Village and I guess a lot of tech people came out of the hippy movement so that makes sense in a way. **Off the High** “Not only had Berners-Lee moved toward law in the divide between civics and code, he had taken a step on the road of a “tyrannous state” – Oh the irony!! “he told the audience that software can reduce the amount of trust you need in human beings” - yah like KPIs at work and that. I’m going to be starting a new day job soon which is going to involve managing humans but also managing data, so I’ve been thinking a lot about how to be a good manager and not rely on KPIs. While their general vibe is pretty dehumanising, I think KPIs can be a two-way street in a way - they give you the power to quantify your work if you need to fight a boss who’s bullying you, so I don’t want to get rid of them entirely - if anyone has any examples of team leadership that balances this well, let me know! “Knowledge workers will lose their autonomy, he told us, they will be forced to use those slavish, dumb machines. They can become mere objects of surveillance by the companies they work for, as a result of “corporate imperialism over its workers” - I’ve not read it yet but this sounds like David Graber’s Bullshit Jobs?? **To Catch a Falling Knife** “drivers who asser their control over the soundscape sine mastering physical space is impossible” - I don’t have any thoughts I just like that description “The idea is to bring millions of viewers to the site. Once all those people are assembled, the companies will find a way to “monetise eyeballs” - that is, make money off the assembly and turn a profit” So any app/service that is cheap or free will inevitably get worse over time. I downloaded a dating app recently that’s been around for free for a while, which suddenly added a subscription, and now it won’t even let you narrow down your search by *country*!! EVERYTHING is a get rich quick scheme now, urgh!! “Microsoft, as ever, was last in invention but first in its ability to out-market its rivals.” - lol

Ti

The Museum of Me: back at it again with the vital importance of hyperlocal context and human interactions being a fundamental part of our existence that we're just systematically throwing out the window. The drive to increase efficiency of finding/claiming things that you only like and care about to the point of??? Literally hellscape/lost of humanity?? A banger piece. Really made me more glad I'm focusing my energy as of late to foster connections in my local mutual aid group via in-person meetings and running errands in my neighborhood instead of getting everything delivered. Mainly to get me out of the house, but also to feel slightly more alive. Fiber Optic Nights: Sci-fi/ghost story-esque vibe. A banger. I appreciate how the later essays call back to this and felt this acted as a sort of prelude to the last two essays of this Part of the collection. Off The High: I honestly need to re-read this one again. I feel like I wasn't "getting it" and had some trouble getting some takeaways here (might have just been in a funky headspace when I read this) I caught the shifts from supporting regulation/anti-corporation vs anti-government/improved technology sentiments, but I really want to take my time to chew on this a bit more. To Catch a Falling Knife: Stocks have always scared the shit out of me and this is exhibit A. I always felt that the stock market was just rich people gambling, but this added the context that it is rich people gambling, but they want non-rich people to throw their funds into the pot for them to walk away with. This sparked some rage in me towards how skewed this system is and how the average joe is always late to the party and pays for it. To think this market mythology is the literal backbone for economic treads is dreadful, but also gives a little nod to just how powerful storytelling is for humans in general. Maybe more folks need to be telling their own stories in general. Skew away from the rich folk mythos and form more hyperlocal community based mythos.

benedict.m

[[[covid-stricken in my childhood bedroom, a cat on my lap. after I finish reading part 2 I take a long shower and watch Paris is Burning on Max (neé HBO). the film is grainy and not always in focus; the people are sweaty, generous, real; the filmmaking is caring, patient, but interrupted every so often by--*a sleek white Lexus in dazzling 4K, the background is greenscreen, the car itself may be too, don't you want this, wouldn't this make you valuable?*--I mute my laptop, grit my teeth. the ad ends and I relax, return to something real.]]] anyone else find this section kind of eerie? it's like finding a dusty tome detailing the fall of a previous civilization, a warning received too late. I think that's how I hoped Lanier's book would feel that way, but I got something different. Ullman is the real deal. "Before the advent of the web, if you wanted to sustain a belief in far-fetched ideas, you had to go out into the desert, or live on a compound in the mountains...Physical reality--the discomfort and difficulty of abandoning one's normal life--put a natural break on the formation of cults, separatist colonies, underground groups, apocalyptic churches, and extreme political parties. But now, without leaving home, from the comfort of your easy chair, you can divorce yourself from the consensus on what constitutes 'truth.'" <89> she wrote this in '98? she was warning about the "post-truth" era in 19-fucking-98??? "in a world where "truth" is a variable concept...how can a consensus be formed? How can we arrive at the compromises that must underlie the workings of any successful society?" <90> what Ullman is naming here might honestly be THE defining struggle of our time, at least politically speaking. I don't think it's as simple as "nobody wants to have rational conversations with conservatives anymore man;" I think we've arrived at a point where the compromises that different groups are willing to make for (what they consider) a healthy, functioning society are wildly different. for a lot of folks broadly on the left, the well-being of disabled people, unhoused people, trans people, [insert other marginalized groups here] is something that they will not compromise on, nor should they. I can't speak as well to the compromises that right-leaning people aren't willing to make without veering into unhelpful strawmanning, but you get my point. some things shouldn't be compromised. some things must be. how do we determine that? how do we do that within our own circles, much less in conversation / conflict with people with wildly different values? I don't have an answer. we haven't finished the book, but I doubt Ullman has an answer either. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ another thing lacking from YANaG that is very present in Life in Code is meaningful critique of capitalist systems and incentives! if you've ever worked in retail / food service / customer service, her observation that the world is "divided not only between the haves and the have-nots but between the ones who get to stay home and everyone else, the ones who deliver the goods to them" probably rang extremely true and hurt your heart <92>. in these chapters she's charting in real time the corporatization & commercialization of the internet, and it's disturbing. "What cannot be done with the hundred millions of bits? What limits can we not surpass? Then a shadow falls over those hopes, and the name of the shadow is AT&T, the metal-clad warrior, soon to possess and control the bits shining through glass." <103> I mean...fuck. this shit feels straight out of Revelation. even more on point is Ullman's description of Whit Diffie's presentation: "Diffie had raised the specter of the evil corporation, its perpetual gaze, its imperialism over the human soul." no need to watch the burnham v bezos video, just read that sentence. "Organize! The rise of labor!" <113> hell yes. "To Catch a Falling Knife" quite literally charts in great detail the financial boom and bust of "the internet" as a product (side note: why does my phone want to capitalize 'internet'?), and the birth of the attention economy. I might have been bored to tears by the financial analysis and jargon if Ullman didn't ground this chapter in what this whole money game is really about: "Stock markets float in clouds of stories. Numbers and mathematical analysis may be the infrastructure but narratives surround the market with words, tales, explanations, myths." <117> "The boom was no longer about the nature and value of the web technologies being created...What drove the mania was the *story* of the web." <124> Ullman makes sure to tell the more truthful story of "a massive transfer of wealth from the bedazzled public to the venture capitalists and young men (yes, men) who sold their stock during the market's mania phase" <125>. it's a sad story, and an ugly one. it's repeated itself many times over since these words were written. it proliferates itself. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ullman's writing is yet again sharp, poignant, often funny, and fucking beautiful. she's inspiring me to write more non-fic and I just want to point to some phrases & sentences I like: "the synaptic drift of dreams, a loosening of intention" <83> "Ah! The manhole of mystery" <99> "We're nickname friends, thinks my wet brain" <102> "We must go back to that internet, even if it existed only for a flickering moment, or never existed except in idylls and nostalgia." <111> "on the bad days, 'motherfucker' prevails; on the very worst ones, guys get out of their cars and have fistfights." <116> "the seductive, vulgar, waggling finger of porn." <121> "No one goes down the manhole of mystery anymore." <126> lastly: "Curse of the self taught: fear that you only know points here and there, islands of knowledge, and between them there are chasms into which you will fall in humiliating failure." <101> [[[the cat is off my lap. my nose runs. my instincts--or maybe my addiction--tell me to open youtube on my phone and put something on. but at least for right now I'll resist that. instead I'll take this book outside and walk around my neighborhood reading it, as I've been doing recently. I've been thinking about that Rilke poem "Archaic Torso of Apollo," which spends a few stanzas elegantly describing this ancient, faded sculpture and then abruptly ends with the sentence "You must change your life." I had a professor who said he loved that line because you can place the emphasis on each of its five words and get five different meanings. but each reading is valuable and True. "see" you guys next week 🍓]]]

D.S Films

Sexting It isn't sex it's the next best thing Sexting Aye, aye AT&T Thank god for telecommunications, for instant connection. Super fast broadband, 4K processing bandwidth. Our most instinctual desires at our fingertips. These multi-coulored pixels astound us, making us forget there was ever anything else. I am reminded of the scene in the movie 'Don't Look Up' where Leo Di Caprio goes on a rant on the news about how 'we can't talk to each other anymore': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L99-t5OvSbk We are so connected, but we have forgotten how to communicate truth. Ellen Ullman could see it coming, probably when that 'homeless man' stopped coming to do yoga.

Silver

[fell yesterday into the yt-hole of artsy tumblr-mood-post photo and video colages with girls in their 20s philosophising about their emotional life and romanticising everyday communal life and experience https://youtu.be/7kseFWPllIo?si=wGUC6SoZ1zSwHMWz (highly recommend its beautiful) coupled with the last page of to catch a falling life and a beautiful rohmer movie finishing it of i lost myself in the beauty of it all. but i just indulged myself in the aesthetic and performance of actual embodied experience of being human in nature and community through media and didnt leave my room. something for me to chew on] anyways i loved this thought: "Following hyperlinks on the web is like the synaptic drift of dreams, a loosening of intention, the mind associating freely, an experience that can be compelling or baffling or unsettling, or all of those thinks at once." (p.83) I love how deeply out of this world just clicking a link could be at the time, now we hardly notice when it happens as it has become second nature to us. the following sentence on the other hand still deeply resonants with me: "And, like dreams, the experience of the web is intensely private, charged wiith immanent meaning for the person inside the experience, but often confusing or irrelevant to someone else." (p. 83) just yes also ive never heard the term disintermediation before partly because there is no german equivalent but omg yes "[...] an attempt to convince the indivual that a change currently being visited upon him or her is a good thing, the purest form of self, the equivalent of freedom." (p. 85) the freedom to consume whats being fed directly into you without any intermediary. pure individuality, argh i hate it now, she describes her search for a faucet on the web, falling in a kind of rabbit hole of comparison and hating the amount of time she unneccessarily spent on this because of her missing expertese a intermediary could have given her. I was wondering why i couldn't really relate as my online shopping escapades take one google search, taking the first or second result and be done with it. I feel like this is the result of algorithms but maybe someone else has a better thought out idea. fiber optic nights "Thanks, but I'm tired of programming." (p. 102) I was very impressed by her turning down the job-offer by google himself. She describes it as her weakness of insecurity and so on, but i find it incredible that she listened to her internal feeling that knows the job would be the wrong space for her. maybe its just my young inexperienced ass but i dont know if i would be strong enough to not take the opportunity to make money and then quit or something. to catch a falling knife "Microsoft, as ever, was last in invention but first in its ability to out-market its rivals." to quote Lou Corben: -lol Ti articulated the aching of my heart perfectly when it comes to the failing of the stock market culture with the average joe being the fuel for finance bros to make even more money so read their essay please its amazing. the only thing i could think while reading the last page was 'the times, they are a-changin' but after thinking about it some more i got something else out of it too Ullman's retelling of the pure optimism of the tech-bubble, the prominent figures slowly learning that their utopia is being hijacked by the continuation of the capitalism they had believed in, ending with the sorrowful last page of to catch a falling knife; its just amazingly written and gut-wrenching at times. The realisation that while being hopelessly capitalistic and overtly masculine-fetishistic, these early figures actually had a real democratic and utopian vision of the internet that they thought would be empowering the people like nothing before in history, and that these figures had to watch while their vision was destroyed by the rise of mega-corperations was really important to me. I was just disgusted by the anarcho-capitalist thinking that drove this culture at first and didnt take their vision seriously up until reflecting on it afterwards. I started anti-capitalist, only getting the humanist core of this culture in the aftermath, while the culture went the opposite route, starting optimistic, only seeing the destructive force of parts of their capitalistic beliefs when it was too late. and then there were the ones that knew or realised the coming crash and cashed out at the right moment, fcking everyone else aaaaaa [i wrote this in part while listening to a romanticising studying spotify-playlist]

Hex Diesis

"The reality is a world divided not only between the haves and have-nots but between the ones who get to stay home and everyone else, the ones who deliver the goods to them." - p92 yuup, another bit of prophecy there, and as someone who has to work a second job as a gig economy delivery person, it resonated with me.

It brought back a memory from the 2020 lockdowns when I was be riding around a town entirely empty aside from delivery workers. The people locked away in their houses were the people with high-status "important" jobs that could be stopped for weeks without society crumbling, whereas on the other side of the divide, the streets were suddenly ours. I don't know what it means, but that memory feels important to me, and this passage really brought it back.

Just Connor

~ Museum of Me ~ "in a world so dominated by markets, I don't think I go too far in saying this will affect the very structure of reality, for the net is no longer simply a zone of personal freedoms, a pleasant diversion from what we used to call "real life"; it has become an actual marketplace that is changing the nature of real life itself." THIS phenomenon is really scary, and the rise of this has exceeded all expectations. not only is the online world just as real for this generation, i would argue for a lot of people, it is MORE real. bo burnham has a little sketch in inside where hes like joking about how the non-digital world is just a theatrical space and a place to get food for the much more real, digital space. obviously no one truly claims this (i think), but people definitely FEEL this way. i always recall cj talking about something similar in the interview with noah samsen or maybe the living philosophy, i dont quite remember. but the line was something like "digital life use to interrupt real life, now its the other way around" THAT FUCKING broke me. as someone who is 19, and grew up literally on the internet it feels like, the closeness to the machine far exceeding those around me, i legitimately am so angry that i was robbed so much non-digital reality. "Removal of the intermediary. All those who stand in the middle of a transaction, whether financial or intellectual: out!" one of my friends cannot stop talking about how we need people like librarians to curate stuff, and part of the reason the online world is so difficult to use as a tool is because of the absolute insane amount of stuff. i love it every time he talks about it, cause its so true, and to see it validated here, is cool. ~ Fiber Optic Nights ~ was great, but nothing to say ~ Off the High ~ this one was very good, i found the different pains of each tech dude really captivating and seeing them each turn from their libertarian hearts. ~ To Catch a Falling Knife ~ I watched most of the lecture, very interesting even tho i know next to nothing about business. "As I had imagined and feared it would, the internet was penetrating the boundaries of economic, social, and personal life." ugh yeah overall these chapters made me really sad that i missed the older stages of the internet, that i didnt get to experience the internet, that Ullman and many others clearly loved. ive only grown up in a world where the internet was a thing ive been constantly fighting against, whether it be money, attention, or social life.

Leo V.

Last chapter did a great job at distilling that stonks seem infinitely more faith-based than scientific. The narrativisation aspect takes me out. Happy that Ullman once again takes something that looks designed to be deliberately obtuse (and it is) and comes at it with an angle of crystalline social awareness

azalea water

i tried to keep these short ---------------------------------------- *^--museum of me--^* In “The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows” by John Koenig, there’s this word: “Moledro, noun: a feeling of resonant connection with an author or artist you’ll never meet, who may have lived centuries ago and thousands of miles away but can still get inside your head and leave behind morsels of their experience…” - (DoOS) And I’ve gotten more moledro with Ullman than I have with nearly every other author I’ve read. The experience that tugs at me the most is her describing a painting near the end of the essay:  “Digital images will do. Never mind losing the tactile sense of paint on canvas, the play of shadow and light as we circle a sculpture, the impression of scale, a work that fills a room you share with tens of others, or requires that you stand close, one person at a time—that intimacy.” - (page 96) Last year, I was at the Tate Britain. And the only painting I remember seeing is a self-portrait by Lucian Freud. I’d seen pictures of it (I’ve loved his work since I was, like, 13). But seeing it in real life was something else. The bumps in the acrylic, the way the light played with the colour, the dead look in the eyes: they hit like bricks when you’re in front of the damn thing. That experience is impossible to communicate in a Jpeg. ---------------------------------------- *^--fibre optic nights--^* It’s weird having a first-hand source from the rise of Google. In my mind, Google is one of those omnipresent companies that seems to have been there from the start of time. But no. Some people woke up one day and thought “Huh, maybe we should start a company based around a search engine.” And then there’s Ullman: a coder caught between the rise of Silicon Valley and the urbanisation of San Francisco.  “From my windows, I used to be able to see a slip of the Bay, the occasional slick of a freighter gliding through, the brick smokestack of an old but still-working power plant, the path of the smoke telling me the direction of the wind. Now the buildings rise and divide the skyline among themselves like it’s loot.” - (page 102) It’s like a moment caught in amber. Here’s this woman with an established distrust of the internet, confronting what will soon be the most powerful advertising company in the world – and she turns down the job. Something in her, a gut instinct, looks at this job at Google and says “No”.  …you lot familiar with a “Faustian bargain”? ---------------------------------------- (not got much to say on “off the high”) ---------------------------------------- *^--to catch a falling knife--^* As a Christian, the closest thing I can compare the stock market to is religion. Believers put themselves and their worth into their claims, hoping for a blessing from the god of the market. Sometimes, that works out for them. And other times, all you’re left with is a dead start-up and a bucketload of debt. The primary example of this is IPO: “I spoke with the founder of a startup. I asked him if he had a path to profitability; he did not. I asked if he had a revenue plan; he did. His answer was “Go IPO!” That is, have an initial public offering and reap the millions from the sale of the stock. Another way to look at this transaction is: Get the general public to finance a company with no known path to making money.” - (page 123) This investor had very little plan other than to tell the story of his company and pray that, eventually, he’d find a path to success. But, unlike God, the god of the stock exchange isn’t a continuous one. It moves in unpredictable ways based on the whims of the market and the world around it, only making assessments after the fact.  Religion is self-perpetuating. For your belief system to be worth anything, it has to exist between other people. For me, God exists in a well-done meal or a seven-hour conversation. They exist in the stories we tell about them and the way we interact with those stories. The stock market is no different: “What drove the mania was the story of the web” - (page 128) I don’t think the god of the stock exchange (or, for that matter, the god of the algorithm) is a kind god. They exist in interactions and stories, rumours and hearsay. But they aren't God. God asks you to worship for the sake of your community and yourself. These gods ask you to worship, or else.

alex

ok, i'm going to Try and keep this a bit more quippy rather than a winding and long narrative. =museum of me= I am once again rattling the bars of my cage every time Ullman uses such anatomical language to describe technology, especially the experience of using it. It makes something so abstract feel solid, fleshy, and fallible. Like it was *actually* built by humans, and not just stuff that just gets shipped into our hands every few years or so. She's almost anthropological whenever she talks about human behavior, too: "[T]alking being one of the primary ways human beings augment their pleasure." (82-83) It's something you don't think about - you don't think about being human, you don't think about pleasure other than dopamine hits engineered to grab you. Like, "pleasure" is so intertwined with sex that the first time I told my best friend about the Pleasure Pier in Galveston, she immediately screwed up her face and assumed I was talking about a bootleg Hooters. Nope, just a pier full of carnival rides. But I also like her repetition of "baby-world," too. "[T]he world really does revolve around me" (83), and is such, you can only trust yourself. In the wise words of Bo Burnham: "You, you. Insatiable you. Mommy let you use her iPad, you were only two. And it did all the things we designed it to do." That is, sever your connection with other people. "It was always the plan to put the world in your hands," sure. So you'd no longer rely on "sidewalks, shops, luncheonettes, street vendors, buses, trams, taxis, other women in the fitting room to tell you how you look in something and to help you make up your mind..." (86) Ullman uses such specific and intimate parts of being human, just to remind us that the "baby-word" of me, me, me, and all the options just make us sick. She didn't have a faucet for weeks because it turns off the part of our brains that's hardwired to help us survive: asking for help. "I had cut myself off from the plumbers, contractors, and plumbing supply salespeople who would have helped me see the world of faucets in its true form - a rather small one, where maybe eight or ten quality units in my price range would have really worked for me." (89) The commercial internet is world of "no neighbors," and in fact, "I don't have to tolerate you and you don't have to tolerate me. [There's n]o need to care for the neighbor next door." (92) You don't have to have a shared experience with your fellow human beings. Why not, when you can visit the museum of you? This was one of the ones where i had to sit in the silence of my room at like 3 am and wonder if this author is me. I also wondered what Jaron Lanier would think of "technology is made by people with intentions, and as such, is not neutral." (85) =Fibre Optic Nights= Admittedly, i don't have a lot of thoughts on this one. Her humor shines through on this one: "Four sigmas away from the center. Five? No. Five sigmas represent a singularity, which i do not believe in. Nonetheless, with Larry..." (101) I dunno, i liked that aside. That combined with the current cultural meaning of sigma and that usually we just call those standard deviations made it kind of cute. Also cute is the little interaction she has with the crew, which is almost so unfathomable my brain has an aside every time i read it wondering if this is fanfiction. Who talks with men at work? Like the updates to our phones shuttled into our hands, that's another background process we don't usually acknowledge. =Off the High= What a splash of cold water. Fibre Optic Nights was an intermission, a slice of life anime palette cleanser after you clear AoT or something. The shift in the fight for privacy (and the tension from Americans who know that that's not something their country super excels in) makes this a rocky chapter. "Without sociopolitical context, cryptography is not going to protect you." (108) I liked this being pointed out so clearly. Lanier made a point of the computer not meaning anything without you interacting with it - the argument against politics here was as if the computers stood silently in a vacuum, and they could be optimized to be infallible. No, humans interact with them. Humans need laws. "Libertarians are used to fighting the government, and not corporations." (110) Highlighter out within the first few words, i knew this was about to get good. "Other people. Trust in human beings. Social structures." YES, YES PLEASE. The way Whit Diffie speaks reminds me of a speaker I listened to at a conference. It was.. a public health conference, so slightly different, but he couldn't stand being at the lectern. He was literally all over the ballroom. I loved it. But, uh. Whit Diffie's entire speech unfortunately was Apollo beating the shit out of him with the gift of prophecy. Man probably opened his third eye, went into r/WFH, and read the top few posts. I'd sit there and blockquote the whole damn thing but you read the passage. But a thought kind of occurred to me. Company towns, I don't think, will happen again. We already have company bedrooms, which you're confined to, just jiggling your mouse so whoever's watching you on the other side knows you're doing something every 10 minutes. =To Catch a Falling Knife= The dot-com bubble! My first understanding of this was :the game:, which is embarrassing, because I'm 26. But in any case, I am very much reminded of the Gamestop/wallstreetbets thing. Watching that mess unfold, "buying the dip" (124) because "the stock was on sale" was repeated ad infinitum. "I want to buy in. i want. I want. i want." (116) Of course Ullman wanted, FOMO is a concept we'll never get rid of. "The naive public were the last ones into the manic market" (124), as was the case of GME, AMC, Bitcoin, Dogecoin, Ethereum.. But that was different. Ullman describes it accurately when she says it was a wealth transfer from the middle class to venture capitalists, and the GME/AMC thing was an attempt to shakedown the stock market for all it's worth. "[T]rading must seem to make sense" (118), when it doesn't. That attempt by dudebros in the market to upend that order of bullshit was evidence that it doesn't work. But we're sung the siren song of the market. The internet's new, it's big, it's explosive. It has porn! So we buy. I won't pretend to understand the market, y'all. The most I understand, unfortunately, is that the middle and working classes "lost what they could not afford to lose" (125). As is the case with any other boom and bust. === ok mission failed we'll get em next time

Stephen Folkerts

crazy week- got job interviews and playing concerts but I'm glad to get back into this wonderful book. off the high-- I think I have the most to say about this and there are many other lovely comments, so I'll just do that. It was highly impactful to see ullman's descriptions of these giants of libertarian freedom suddenly change their worldview and support something that was previously anathema. I've always been deeply interested in those humble moments where people change their minds, move forward despite their driving ideological force changing significantly. Having read snow crash, it was interesting to get a picture of Stephenson himself-especially the disconnect between his dinner speech and the apparent themes of his recent novel. fiction is distinct from philosophy in that it humanizes and acts out (via narrative) the philosophy that informs it. I think it's an extremely necessary way of discovering the consequences of a worldview, as long as the author is willing to let characters and the consequences of their actions bring them along to a place of discomfort (as opposed to a kind of didactic storytelling, though there is a time/place for that.) I think this community has some staying power because it feels authentically community-driven rather than ideologically driven. it's hard to pull off, but it seems there's an acceptance of difference (a truer tolerance, maybe something Jamesian about this)- curiosity and empathy prevails! when larger changes do happen, I think this feature allows for adaptability instead of a sort of collective ego-crushing defeat. excited to read more :))

halley

the museum of me was my favorite essay of the bunch, I thought it made an excellent stand-alone analysis of so many threads beautifully woven together. The kids playing the game at the beginning made me nostalgic for my childhood 90s CD-rom games, using the desktop computer to explore those colorful little worlds full of adventure and learning before ever even getting on-line. I love how she parsed the intensely private experience of the web "like the synaptic drift of dreams", connecting it with the social landscape it functions within and the infantilizing baby-talk of me, my, mine, inherent in the structures we're given to use, language that appeals to our individuality and secret narcissism, stimulating a manufactured adoration of our fragmented new reality(s) disguised as freedom. it sounds like a bad wish being granted by a mischievous genie- now the world really does revolve around you! "I have long believed that the ideas embedded in technology have a way of percolating up and outward into the nontechnical world at large, and that technology is made by people with intentions and, as such, is not neutral." this is what we're here for- examples that illuminate how the supposedly objective (technology, the stock market) are more subjective than assumed- subject to the great power of the stories we tell ourselves and others. "overnight whole areas of functionality vanish, and strange new ones appear. yesterday you were an expert user; today you're a beginner and a fool." I don't know if anyone remembers it but some years ago there was a lot of hype around a new social media platform for artists called 'ello' that was committed to being advertiser-free. I liked the minimalist design because the photos filled up the whole screen and I used it to upload my photography collections for years, and I spent a lot of time choosing the order of the photos to tell my stories in a certain way. one day I went to check it and it was just... gone. the website vanished without any warning and I was the fool for not saving the photos elsewhere. "people who have no choice are generally unhappy. but people with too many choices are almost as unhappy as those who have no choice at all." the faucet problem is so relatable. its kind of like netflix paralysis- how to choose amongst an excess of equally adequate choices? I live somewhere without a walmart or amazon and I quite enjoy my little city adventures to hunt down certain specialty products from the small shops I've come to know- the one place that sells molasses and turkish coffee, the china shop for home goods, the place I like to buy seeds from, the one with the good incense collection, the stall with the best tomatoes. it makes me feel connected to the city, like it needs me and I need it. I've been looking online for a sewing machine and I'm so overwhelmed with options and don't know how to choose, but because there are so many similar options in my price range I'm afraid that if the one I get isn't perfect I'll regret not getting one of the many others. I think this excess of choices can also re-mind us of the value of curators. If a friend recommends a brand of sewing machine or a show to watch it makes it so much easier to limit my options and make that decision. I think this is also why I love thrift shopping and making/mending my own clothes, because when its so easy to find new clothes and get rid of old ones its the story a thing carries that matters and determines what I'm going to hold on to. I love the focus she puts on stories in these chapters. I think story-telling is the most human thing to do, its what art is at its core, and by being an excellent storyteller herself she's able to bring together so many worlds and break all preconceptions about what a technologist is like. I think my favorite thing about her writing is how intensely physical it is. everything she describes is so embodied and particular that it feels incredibly intimate and tangible.

Sol

The book's been excellent and I've been digging in, just a bit pressed for time to reply! There's a sad and dramatic irony to Off the High when it's in the shadow of Fiber Optic Nights, highlighted by the infamous AT&T switching center on 611 Folsom Street. Room 641A hadn't happened yet, but it will: the NSA will be tapping telecommunications to spy on the public en masse without warrants or due cause in that building. The libertarian technologist ethos is built, as she notes, on networks made for espionage and the department of defense. There's a cybernetic feedback loop of engagement and surveillance that seems to follow the internet like a destiny. The name *cybernetics* coined by Norbert Wiener is derived from the Greek word for "steersman", an image reflecting the control dynamics of the cybernetic idea. Apocryphally, Wiener's initial name for it was derived from the Greek word for messenger: "angel", dubbing it "angelonics". It was discarded due to the ecclesiastic ring that it has, of course, and a name could only change something so much. But I have wondered what an "angelonic" system would look like, opposed to a cybernetic one. Recently I installed an emulation of the 1996 computer game *fin fin: On TEO the Magic Planet*. It's sort of a pet simulator, the titular fin fin being an adorable flying dolphin that you interact with via diagetic screens that peek into locations on the alien ecosystem he lives in. He responds in a variety of ways to the volume of sound input through a microphone, and to fruit you can offer him in certain locations, but otherwise, that's it. Most of the game play loop is spent not engaging with it- sometimes fin fin just flies off, there's alien wildlife that will shuffle in and out of frame, and when fin fin is spending time with you what he's up to is kind of ambiguous, even if you put on the "biosensor" UI option that displays "Fear" "Happiness" and so on. Seemingly out of the clear blue air he'll sing, which is genuinely charming and moving. It was apparently a disaster, business-wise. Something like seven years of technological progress and millions of dollars producing and hyping what is an essentially very boring game. fin fin feels made to be a buddy to listen to podcasts with, and to play it in '96 must have been baffling, though it did have its niche. It was built with a different design ethos than we've come to expect from games, and even most technology: fin fin is meant to be interpreted, *not to interpret you*. Interaction has become the name of the game, but interaction is the interpretation of human users through a cybernetic feedback loop. Natasha Dow Schull's *Adiction By Design* illustrates this through an extremely comprehensive and compellingly written account of machine gambling. Through being inserted into a machinic assembly, the gamblers are interpreted, and extracted from their lives. Social media, video games, productivity programs- so much follows this pattern of the machinic interpretation, of the cybernetic control society. If I were to pose a theory of angelonics as opposed to cybernetics, it would be a system that relies on interpretation to function, not on itself interpreting and compiling inputs. It would take inspiration firstly from divinatory practices like the Tarot and the I Ching- it's been said these are the first cybernetic systems, how they function with inputs and outputs, their own matricies and arrays, but that's not exactly true. When you draw a card, watch birds, pick up yarrow sticks, a message occurs. There is not necessarily a command, not necessarily a hierarchical structure, not necessarily a control structure. We can choose to sit with the message or not. There's an ambiguity, a freedom and a terror, to the message- it's a return to the wilderness. However, I should get around to Wiener's writing sometime before I get too ahead of myself, I realize as I search some things on the side. Maybe *The Human Use of Human Beings*, which has such a menacing title. Anyway, cheers!

yennik arual

+ Museum Of Me tapped into things i've been thinking about for the last , like, eighteen months. her story of how "the set of all faucets in the universe had expanded to infinity" (p 92) reminded me of something baudrillard said:- “the great disappearance is […] the division of the subject to infinity, of a serial pulverization of consciousness into all the interstices of reality. we might say, at a pinch, that consciousness (the will, freedom) is everywhere; it merges with the course of things and, as a result, becomes superfluous.” (baudrillard, 2009:28) i draw this comparison also for their uses of the word "infinity" and how they contrast. ullman uses it as if knowledge of x is expanding so much that it is no longer useful. growth, everything everywhere. meanwhile, baudrillard's use was that all these thousands of individual entries into the understanding and selling of the faucet makes the faucet harder to perceive until it is nothing. jamais vu. there is too much going on online, but we are expected to keep up with it. everything becomes nothing. it is sensory deprivation (bowring, 2007). ullman recognises this a few pages later as she mulls over david ross' claims for physical reality's unnecessity in distributing/receiving art. "digital images will do. never mind losing the tactile sense of paint on canvas, the play of shadow and light as we circle a sculpture, the impression of scale, a work that fills a room you share with tens of others, or requires that you stand close, one person at a time—that intimacy" (96). as established, the ever-increasing individualising of the commercial internet structures a commercialising of our souls. i find something very burnham in the comparison of real-life shopping centres melting away and being replaced with online sites To Buy From and Be At; and also in final sentence of this chapter, in which it gets its name. "the museum of me" (97) is too easily accessible. how many times have you looked at your own instagram story? your own comment here? how many times have you looked at who else has looked at it? at who has responded? tapped a little heart? ++ her introduction of larry in Fiber Optic Nights is soooooooooooooooooooo parasocial-coded. am i telling on myself? when i saw my first celebrity crush live in person at fifteen years of age it literally felt unreal. i'm not using that word to rhetorically exaggerate, it literally felt difficult to comprehend them. "i was aware of being in a presence beyond anything i have known in a human being" (104). all these attachments and connotations you've built up in your head around these images and ghosts of an individual... the reality around them seems different when you are in the same room. crush whatever mechanism inside your imagination has permitted this, you are in over your head!!!!!!!!>< i applaud the swiftness and courage of her weighing up the pros and cons of working for someone she held in so high regard, and concluding that she could not. the final words, again: transposing "fire" with "fiber" (107) was very satisfying. there are frequent crumbs of prose that are truly delectable and this is one of them. (bonus) brainrot moment: "four sigmas away from the center" (104) made me stand up and look at the sky for a few minutes before returning to read. fuc +++&++++ the next two chapters in this part i wasn't as stimulated by, mainly because i have no interest in stock, and reading the politics of encryption made me feel a little out of my depth. but her mention of the emergence of online porn as bandwidth improved reminded me of the origins of google photos (people wanted to see jennifer lopez at the recent grammys of the time). the demand for gazing upon women's bodies generated an incredible technology, but i wonder what it would've taken to push huican zhu and susan wojcicki (and/or anyone else) to commit to creating it had the male gaze as a societal structure not existed. i am sure there are many such cases

Lucas Regis

Late to this one. I'm sorry 😭 Loved the Museum of Me!! The idea that automatic curation is actually making us more anti-social because of the lack of common experiences resonates deeply with me. I love the streaming service MUBI because the content there is actually curated!! by real people!! wow!! Paradoxically I actually end up watching more stuff there than in algorithmic services like Netflix that attempt to finely tune to my taste, because I don't get infinite choice paralysis, and I am forced to trust in the taste of others. It's a better translation of the art gallery/indie theater experience to the virtual stage. Ullman's writing is both prophetic and deeply immersed in its time and place in a very romantic sense. I'm in love with it. "What cannot be done with the hundred millions of bits? What limits can we not surpass? Then a shadow falls over those hopes, and the name of the shadow is AT&T, the metal-clad warrior, soon to possess and control the bits shining through glass." This quote calls out to me; my heart, my sense of hope and wonder, is deeply wounded by class consciousness haha

reva

a short comment this week as i attempt to catch up! i read part 2 slowly over the course of many days, which messed with my ability to experience it as a cohesive whole somewhat. but not enough for me to not consider it an extremely cohesive whole! i really liked the storytelling vibe of this section, i think ullman has a fantastic narrative voice and the Feeling of this specific period of time in this specific place is best conveyed through a narrative like this. i identify with ullman's desire to understand and find meaning in what's happening around her. i think if i lived in her apartment during those fiber optic nights, i too would stare at the construction workers through my window and wonder just what they were doing. also i am THRILLED to receive confirmation for my growing hunch that yes, the stock market is just a bunch of stories and whether they are true isn't really the point. stocks have always felt to me like a vague sort of game we all agree to play together but i was like, maybe there's some sort of logic to it i just don't know about? am i just out of the loop? so i'm grateful to see such a solid explanation of how un-solid the whole affair is. this is the diversion-from-tech-manifesto-into-discussion-of-financial-systems i wanna see (1 point for life in code, 0 for yanag)

phil e the theyby

OK so The Museum of Me made me understand CJ's whole "art is objective this really fucking matters guys" perspective in a way I think I didn't before. Like, I think I understood the premise, but I didn't get why it was so urgent to them. But reading this chapter really made me realize that what we lose by everything being personally tailored is...the ability to have a culture at all? And I don't see this simply as "this is bad we have to go back," because you really can't go BACK. You have to figure out how to build a sense of culture and community in a creative marketplace specifically designed to kill it. So basically, Kill the Internet is really important, y'all. Fiber Optic Nights was a beautifully told emotional journey. Off the High was sobering as hell, and I think it really speaks to how allowing the engine of capitalism to barrel forward can come to crush even those who believe in it the most fervently. I feel like "To Catch a Falling Knife" was really interesting to look back at in our current point in history. Obviously there's the wild speculation and the dramatic economic consequences of that (and I FULLY share the rant energy CJ shared about it). I also thinking about the strategy of "operate at a loss, it'll come back and pay off HUGE I promise bro," while endemic at the time, is also what Amazon did. Everyone was aiming to monopolize a market, but while most folks were trying to monopolize some new corner of online commerce, Amazon was monopolizing...the very concept of online commerce itself? And when entities like Amazon and Google control such massive portions of the economy, everyone is dramatically impacted by small decisions of a vanishingly small number of people in power. Obviously people in power have always had vast impact on the lives of everyone else, but it tended to be at least somewhat localized (to, say, a specific industry or governmental body). And I think all of that consolidation makes the problems described in To Catch a Falling Knife and makes them SO much worse. So yeah, I echo the need for the working class to build financial literacy and agency. It's needed now more than ever.