What a timely topic with great insights. The interplay between screens & social media and the resultant hyper-reality we find ourselves often living in is not often discussed with any depth.
Maybe, eventually as we realize how our stories have been granted to us, our emotions hijacked, and the forces which coordinated (with unspoken agendas) to manipulate us and even usurp our very sense of self-sovereignty - all these factors will combine to create the conditions of busting through the fake-world and reclaiming our minds, our time, ourselves. Our reality.
I like to think so. The greater the abuses piled on, the greater the rewards once freed from them.
"It is, perhaps, indicative of the bias of our intensely technological and, therefore, narcotic culture that we have long interpreted the Narcissus story to mean that he fell in love with himself, that he imagined the reflection to be Narcissus!"
And I wrote that a decade ago. It has only grown in clarity and relevance since then. It is like some Jason Bourne or Tom Clancy novel. The parallels are there. Just watch The Matrix now as opposed to two decades ago. No longer science-fiction, but science-fact.
There is a very interesting open source project going on in the area of social media and the web, called Solid, and guided by the inventor of the original web, Tim Berners-Lee and his W3C organization.
The basic idea is an inversion of control. Instead of apps owning data, a person or organization owns data and apps are allowed to access it based on permissions given by the person or organization. So instead of 100 apps duplicating your personal information on their servers and possibly getting it wrong, you keep your personal information on your server or a server you designate and the 100 apps have to use it there. This puts the burden on apps to use this data based on one's permissions and expectations and the expectations of other apps about how data will be structured. This is an entirely new burden that apps are not used to dealing with, the control of the data being in the hands of the data owner, that being the individual or organization. Its an ongoing project and many of the details of this inversion of control have yet to be worked out.
I am fascinated by this project, although I have reservations about it.
My reservations revolve around the role of organizations as stewards of data. I have no problem with individuals controlling their own data, their personal profiles, their likes and dislikes, their history and opinions, their accomplishments, their connections.
But when it comes to organizations doing this, being the stewards of information that many people and apps will have to rely on, and being able to set permissions to that data based on broad groups of people, then I have a problem. It seems to me that for organizations, Solid is tailor made to be used to implement a social credit system.
I worry about this even more when I consider the nature of open source software projects and standards bodies. They are by their nature not democracies. Some would even go so far as to call them cults. After all, what is a "do-ocracy"? The more of your time and energy you donate, the more you are allowed to know about the goals and presumably the more control you have. Just like a cult. When employees from large corporations are involved, they completely skew the power balance of these "public-private partnerships". Some would go as far as to call it fascist. I have not come across anyone looking into these considerations.
"I see a pattern or a collection of patterns that point to how the boundary between the world of our minds can engage in the world apart "from our minds"can become a place where life is made whole."
I don't believe wholeness can be achieved through accommodation to the hyper-real. We must reclaim the real in our lives through direct engagement.
What a timely topic with great insights. The interplay between screens & social media and the resultant hyper-reality we find ourselves often living in is not often discussed with any depth.
Maybe, eventually as we realize how our stories have been granted to us, our emotions hijacked, and the forces which coordinated (with unspoken agendas) to manipulate us and even usurp our very sense of self-sovereignty - all these factors will combine to create the conditions of busting through the fake-world and reclaiming our minds, our time, ourselves. Our reality.
I like to think so. The greater the abuses piled on, the greater the rewards once freed from them.
"It is, perhaps, indicative of the bias of our intensely technological and, therefore, narcotic culture that we have long interpreted the Narcissus story to mean that he fell in love with himself, that he imagined the reflection to be Narcissus!"
Never heard that take on Narcissus - brilliant.
Thank you, Ed.
And I wrote that a decade ago. It has only grown in clarity and relevance since then. It is like some Jason Bourne or Tom Clancy novel. The parallels are there. Just watch The Matrix now as opposed to two decades ago. No longer science-fiction, but science-fact.
Indeed. Metaverse is a matrix within a matrix. I plan on rewatching that soon!
Hope you have a wonderful Christmas, Ed. Look forward to speaking soon.
Yes. and to you.
made this comment also at https://edbrenegar.substack.com/p/the-impact-of-persons-on-networks/comment/11353749
There is a very interesting open source project going on in the area of social media and the web, called Solid, and guided by the inventor of the original web, Tim Berners-Lee and his W3C organization.
The basic idea is an inversion of control. Instead of apps owning data, a person or organization owns data and apps are allowed to access it based on permissions given by the person or organization. So instead of 100 apps duplicating your personal information on their servers and possibly getting it wrong, you keep your personal information on your server or a server you designate and the 100 apps have to use it there. This puts the burden on apps to use this data based on one's permissions and expectations and the expectations of other apps about how data will be structured. This is an entirely new burden that apps are not used to dealing with, the control of the data being in the hands of the data owner, that being the individual or organization. Its an ongoing project and many of the details of this inversion of control have yet to be worked out.
I am fascinated by this project, although I have reservations about it.
My reservations revolve around the role of organizations as stewards of data. I have no problem with individuals controlling their own data, their personal profiles, their likes and dislikes, their history and opinions, their accomplishments, their connections.
But when it comes to organizations doing this, being the stewards of information that many people and apps will have to rely on, and being able to set permissions to that data based on broad groups of people, then I have a problem. It seems to me that for organizations, Solid is tailor made to be used to implement a social credit system.
I worry about this even more when I consider the nature of open source software projects and standards bodies. They are by their nature not democracies. Some would even go so far as to call them cults. After all, what is a "do-ocracy"? The more of your time and energy you donate, the more you are allowed to know about the goals and presumably the more control you have. Just like a cult. When employees from large corporations are involved, they completely skew the power balance of these "public-private partnerships". Some would go as far as to call it fascist. I have not come across anyone looking into these considerations.
The sentence could be improved.
"I see a pattern or a collection of patterns that point to how the boundary between the world of our minds can engage in the world apart "from our minds"can become a place where life is made whole."
I don't believe wholeness can be achieved through accommodation to the hyper-real. We must reclaim the real in our lives through direct engagement.