******************************************************* * The EduVerse chat session: Thu Aug 10, 2000 1:30 PM * ******************************************************* [See page bottom for key to avatar identities.] DavidW: howdy, Michael blip: hey ommm: you folks look like you're ready to float... DavidW: Beautiful plumage, the Norwegian Blue. ommm: and we have a lab rat from Malibu with us today DavidW: He is, I assume, a-mazed? CliffJ: Help, I'm lost blip: hehe DavidW: +Howdy Cliff! MalibuLabRat: actually, we are a bunch of surf lab rats here blip: LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE!!! ommm: hey blip clack: hi blip blip: Hey everybody clack: make love, not war, blip blip: hehe clack: haha blip: hoho blip: is that black ball the plankton node? CliffJ: Hello, Michael and David and all ommm: hello Cliff, and welcome virt: hi all DavidW: Can plankton do anything except bob up and down? CliffJ: I'm a Lab rat every day ;-> ommm: plankton are more or less passive CliffJ: I want to go to the plankton room! How do we get there? DavidW: Which is it, more or less? Let's get some precision here!
ommm: okay, let's go there in a little while when we do the Plankton Bob together... DavidW: Or is bobbing necessarily a precisely vague term? MalibuLabRat: Cliff - we're lab rats on the cliff overlooking Malibu Beach and the Santa Monica Bay ommm: welcome Hypatia CliffJ: I'm a lab rat looking at the charred contaminated slopes "akejay": Wheeeee! CliffJ: I flew out of the frame here, and I get a better view looking back at everyone ClaudiaU: where is everybody? DavidW: I'm just plankton. I'm passive. Will someone give me a shove so I can see, too? CliffJ: Can't plankton move? CliffJ: I mean the avatars. . . blip: click on the screen ommm: plankton are not animated but they can bob up and down "akejay": Where'd you go? DavidW: Oh, I can move. But I don't feel like it. ommm: why not put on a plankton everyone and see what i mean CliffJ: Poof! I'm a plankton
ClaudiaU: hi mike "akejay": I've been a plankton too long. clack: who is the plankton enshrined in a black obelisk ommm: you have choices: plankton, plunkton, plonkton, ... peanut: hi mike! ommm: hey peanut "akejay": Mmmm, plankton. Nutritious. ClaudiaU: they are boots? CliffJ: I seem to be moving fine as a plankton ommm: later today we can all do the collective plankton float...in the dark belly of...cyberspace CliffJ: I prefer my beautiful plumage MalibuLabRat: Omm, are there any AW spaces where avatars can 'touch' each other or objects? ClaudiaU: good question... ommm: we've very pleased today to have the Cluetrain meet the Global Brain "akejay": Yay! ommm: we might get started now since we have a small school of fish at the moment peanut: blurb virt: waitng for elaborations on market manifesto and cybernetic philosophy ommm: we've delighted that Cliff Joslyn from Los Alamos Lab ommm: and David Weinberger of Cluetrain fame have both agreed to speak to us today about different models of understanding the Net CliffJ: (Elvis-esque) Thank you, thank you very much virt: clap clap "akejay": Whoooooo! peanut: can planktons clap? clack: here here Hypatia: applause "akejay": It's just like the sound of one hand... CliffJ: Let me first say how pleased Francis and I, and especially Val Turchin, will be at the enthusiastic appreciation of plankton seen here "akejay": clap. ommm: hahaha topcat: the plankton appreciate in return I'm sure... "akejay": That's my unicellular Zen clap. ommm: you folks inspired us with your "plankton" metaphor CliffJ: Can someone speak to how this community came to know this?
CliffJ: And what it means to you? blip: (colors seem to defeat the plankton purpose) ommm: let's see ... who was it who latched onto that paper topcat: jenny, is she here yet? clack: we read different things on your web site-- it was jenny ommm: let's see, is Jenny here today? blip: Sally DavidW: I got disconnected while bobbing. Don't know why. clack: no sally here topcat: yeah right, she is sally CliffJ: Well, yes, more importantly how you interpret this concept? (David: do you know what we're talking about?) ommm: bobbing can be overdone... DavidW: No, I bobbed too violently and broke my connection (?). What are you talking about? ommm: haha CliffJ: Human Plankton: it's a reference from some PCP papers. Should I respond briefly for everyone's benefit? topcat: well sally saw it and we were talking about the ethical issues of universal access viz claims for global representation "akejay": Yes, please. ommm: plez, cliff Hypatia: yes, do DavidW: yes, please virt: yes please do cliff CliffJ: Our philosophy is based on evolutionary principles CliffJ: This has wide-raining implications for ethics, epistemology, metaphysics, etc. CliffJ: In particular, we say (roughly) that the ultimate "good" is the continuance of evolutionary processes CliffJ: As a scientific theory, then, we're inclined to inquire about the future of evolution "akejay": That's a "good" start blip: "good?" CliffJ: In the meta-system transition model, the "next step" of evolution depends on the development of a higher level of control DavidW: The good is survival? Or is there a sense of progress in your notion of evolution? topcat: hmmm CliffJ: For example, human thinking is a higher level of control over associations of mental representations virt: control seems rational? "akejay": Ah, the Metasystem Transition. CliffJ: Similarly, social systems are a level of control over human thinking virt: ok CliffJ: The sinister aspects of this aside for now, we could predict that cybernetic technology would emerge as THE way in which evolution would continue CliffJ: In particular, there would result super-beings or hyper-beings or meta-beings or some such ommm: more control, more evolution... CliffJ: In which humans would be joined in some fashion through cybernetic technology "akejay": Global Mind. CliffJ: The "plankton" reference is to the fact that, first, in evolutionary systems, earlier forms are retained
"akejay": Oh, good, so humans survive. That's nice. topcat: (more taste, less filling?) CliffJ: For example, mitochondria fill your cells, and bacteria fill the world, and plankton the ocean peanut: ha ha ha clack: don't be so literal "akejay": Postliteral. DavidW: How literal is Cliff being? CliffJ: Furthermore, our concept of control allows for exactly the freedom of human thought clack: i meant that to topcat:) topcat: she was chastising me "akejay": Vannevar Bush literal CliffJ: as the necessary attribute for the origin of this higher level of control CliffJ: Thus those people who did not WISH to integrate would not only be " CliffJ: allowed" CliffJ: they would thereby thus be exercising the very freedom necessary to make a robust super-being "akejay": I just posted "As We May Think" to a list the other day... blip: First plankton on the list CliffJ: Thus, they would remain as "human plankton" DavidW: "As We May Think" being a Vannevar Bush article? "akejay": Food for the whales. sally: plankton with no negative connotation? "akejay": Yeah. clack: hi sally! "akejay": What's negative about plankton. Very nutritious. sally: hi clack CliffJ: I can answer your questions more, but I'm also interested in how this group takes that concept? sally: hi everyone ommm: sally, please explain how you took the plankton.. topcat: yeah, plankton as useful holdovers for free thinking nutrient supply blip: red plankton MalibuLabRat: So how does this evolution support freedom of human thought? sally: i think that is exactly why I have an issue with the plankton model CliffJ: David: I'm being somewhat literal. Obviously it's beyond highly speculative, but we're serious. virt: could you plaese say what you mena by "superbeing"? sally: those who do not wish to join sally: become in their own free will, as it were CliffJ: So are all the plankton here making some sort of statement? ;-> sally: holdovers for free thinking nutrient supply "akejay": A provision for the nonbelievers. How complete. virt: superbeing sounds a bit nietzschean sally: yeah! sally: whoo hoo, CliffJ: Yeah, not "uber-being" "akejay": Nietazsche was an apocalyptic prophet: The End of History CliffJ: Well, super-being, meta-being, and hyper-being all have different connotations CliffJ: It goes to the nature of the integration, and the degree of specialization "akejay": No more kings. CliffJ: Some would argue that all social systems are in a way super-beings: the division of labor in economic systems CliffJ: is like the specialization of cells in the body. virt: marx and the division of labour? DavidW: Does "super" only mean that it's at a higher level of abstraction? CliffJ: As multicellular organisms we are "meta-beings": beings that consist of other beings ClaudiaU: and the big companies? CliffJ: A super-being would be any large collections of beings, like an ecosystem "akejay": "Level" is an abstraction. topcat: and a hyper being? Is it linked? CliffJ: Yeah, we never developed "hyper-being". We just love the prefixes. . . sally: and is their a hierarchy, in which those who choose to become plankton are lower in the great cosmic scale, or or they not in the picture at all? topcat: hahahah virt: ok, so superbeing is the result of cybernetic processes? "akejay": Inter-being? virt: superbeing, sorry sally: sorry for mispelling CliffJ: The ethics of all this stuff, what or who is "good" or "bad" is very tricky, of course "akejay": Ultra-being? CliffJ: We would never wish to say that those who integrate are good, and those who don't are bad "akejay": That's very evolved. clack: it's hard to view plankton as other than hardly significant DavidW: Why are the ethics hard? You started us out by founding all of this on a value statement about evolution... sally: is there a delineation between good and bad, higher and lower, in this cybernetic system? CliffJ: To answer one of Mike's earlier questions, and David's now, we are proposing only a macro-ethical statement: peanut: what is the implication of using the idea of evolution? topcat: or are inefficient, inferior, non-participatory...how is it possible to avoid non-evaluative language? CliffJ: That what is "good" in general is what furthers survival, or evolution, as a whole blip: Sounds dangerous "akejay": Unicellular algae are still the largest source of o2, as far as I know... peanut: the question of origin is still up in the air it seems? CliffJ: That is, what keeps the planet going and the species (not just OUR species, but the whole thing) DavidW: But plankton are better survivors than humors so far. Better track record. CliffJ: Indeed, and there's a tough choice between primacy and supremacy DavidW: humors=humans. Freudian, I'm sure. Sorry. sally: and they are the ones who choose not to be part of the cybernetic evolution... "akejay": This is very dangerous, you know what' you're trying to replace, right? ommm: haha CliffJ: In evolutionary biology, which is more successful, the plankton or the human? CliffJ: Aside from the fact that we haven't proven ourselves to be selective in the long run DavidW: better adapted to environment: plankton "akejay": There's more plankton than us. topcat: well, plankton can't go to the movies... clack: isnt there more to life than survival? CliffJ: Yea, but not better able to EVOLVE DavidW: Yeah, but there's no Arnold Schwarzenplankton. CliffJ: We say that EVOLVABILITY Is the good ommm: lol sally: plankton can't chat about being plankton...or do they?? clack: ??? ommm: very finny topcat: can plankton see it's snowing? "akejay": is there meta-survival? omar: what do y'all mean by success.... that's seems a very anthropocentric concept CliffJ: Or, plankton might be better adapted to THIS environment, but the next? "akejay": They sense the light in a way we never do... MalibuLabRat: gotta let the computer get back to work. we'll check out the log later clack: okay... clack: so did van gogh blip: what next? sally: schizophrenia CliffJ: I'm just pleased that we all love plankton so much topcat: yes, (gong) next! DavidW: If you dropped the value statements, you'd still be describing the same movement of history, right? CliffJ: That's one comment that we'll never live down topcat: no "akejay": There's a lot to admire about a species whose priority is to float in the sea... CliffJ: Yeah, I'm not sure. It's true that bringing in the ethical ideas makes things a lot harder for us CliffJ: But we started out with the (humble ;->) idea to build a complete philosophy around cybernetic ideas "akejay": It's the Big Enchilada... Grand Unification of the Philosophies... "akejay": High energy stuff! topcat: science does not operate in isolation, so then naturally everything else comes in too CliffJ: That unification is two-fold: on the one hand, we didn't think that we had The Answer "akejay": Just described the Question well. blip: What makes cybernetica different from any other process of nature? CliffJ: But we DO believe that only through cybernetic technology can a large gropu of people come to a consensus about what The Philosophy might be peanut: good q blip CliffJ: Well, I don't mean to dominate things here, is there an agenda otherwise? "akejay": So a meta-being is unified by a Purpose or Principle? "Singularian": This System is still seriously flawed, in that as I try to hold the scrollbar and read an argument, the system yanks control from me to force me to read the latest post, and then I have lost my place. Is there any way to override this? What a shame topcat: in part because only the users of the technology can detect the impact of its use? ommm: DavidW: do you think the Net communication can aim to a unified philosophy or world view? "akejay": We need to get away from these damn screens... clack: not now topcat: singlu: you have a MS 2000 conflict...have to install a little program blip: Net paradigm blip: ?
DavidW: I think there are some generally true things that can be said about the Web, and I think its architecture tends us towards certain values, but, no, Mike. "akejay": Screen paradigm is killing my eyes. ommm: the values communicated don't converge? "akejay": "Computer monitor" paradigm is what I mean. CliffJ: I guess my claim would be that it is necessary, but maybe not sufficient DavidW: Cliff, what is the "it"? Sorry... CliffJ: Sorry: that cybernetic technology (all this) is necessary for a distributed group of people to build a large philosophical system ommm: will there be a single Net philosophy? ommm: it is necessary to have a shared view of the Net? DavidW: NOOOOO! Please not a single Net philosophy!!!! omar: single philosophy, unlikely virt: i do not think that a philosophical consensus is necessary CliffJ: Our work started because the three of us wanted to do this CliffJ: We never wanted to export that to the world CliffJ: On the contrary, cybernetic technology is ALSO necessary to represent the diversity blip: how does representation fit in? "akejay": Ultra-philosophy? Meta-philosophy? clack: the right tool for the right job CliffJ: For example, take a concept like "evolution" or "control" CliffJ: These are the things we care about. DavidW: But, can we disagree thoroughly with you, Cliff, and not be "mere" plankton? (The right answer is: Yes :-) topcat: lol virt: ok go on omar: perhaps what the net might do is a re-interrogation of classic idealist v. materialist positions CliffJ: We foresaw a system whereby the three of us could represent one view CliffJ: Another group, another view, but they'd be unified IF ONLY by their linkage to the same nodes: "control" and "evolution" nomad: Sorry, tech problems in the Studio. . . I am at the Death Star now CliffJ: At the limit is the "null consensus": agree to disagree topcat: let's hear more from David. CliffJ: So, David, YES DavidW: Sign me up for one of the null consensus! ommm: yes, control is the key to cybernetics, no? virt: ok, it is a paradox cliff CliffJ: It's a BALANCE between freedom and constraint clack: what is it that David W disagrees with? blip: or organization topcat: right, that's why it's called cyber-netics CliffJ: Our academic field cherished diversity at the expense of having NO normative theory topcat: sounds like my book teukros: this is a good session, n'est pas? CliffJ: We wanted to devise a way whereby that could be approached with the appropriate "collaborative granularity" DavidW: Cliff's view of evolution, the value he finds at the heart of it, the ontology of super-beings, the seeming hierarchy of being it establishes, and the desirability of agreeing on this stuff! CliffJ: Sometimes it's just me, sometimes the three of us, where possible, a larger group clack: right... topcat: David, where does your group fit within the context of what Cliff is describing? ommm: there's a lot of interest in the notion of a single Global Brain DavidW: I find what Cliff is doing absolutely fascinating. And I think it accords very well with what philosophy traditionally has tried to do. "akejay": I am awestruck. DavidW: (Sorry to use the word "traditional" there, Cliff. I meant it positively.) topcat: lol blip: hehe nomad: Where do we fit in this Global, trans human brain? Does it need us? CliffJ: It doesn't just need you: it IS you, it IS us virt: we are part of this brain, nomad "akejay": Is It Us? topcat: brains r us virt: at least according to last meeting CliffJ: Some would say it's ALWAYS been here "akejay": Are We It? CliffJ: That that's what a culture or society is: clack: David do you feel that the global brain is a fascist conception? CliffJ: a way to control (constrain, educate, instruct) the mental representations of its members DavidW: Cliff, let's say you're wrong and there is no super-being, no Global trans brain. Would we be able to tell? sally: what about non computer literate societies/ Hypatia: sounds a bit like God, though, yes? "akejay": Will its whole be greater than us, its little parts? peanut: yes hypatia' sally: how are they part of cybernetic brain? CliffJ: David: do you mean now, or ever? Hypatia: is it just a secular type of religious philosophy? or am I being too simplistic? virt: yes, H, there is a slight feeling of religion, isn't it "akejay": Metasystem Transition sounds Apocalyptic to me. CliffJ: It's no more religious than saying you ARE your cells DavidW: I mean now. Let's say there is a super-being today. And tomorrow it poofs away, leaving the Web and the rest of us.... Would there be any observable or know-able change? peanut: is involvement in the GB predicated on awareness of the concept? CliffJ: Well, I don't believe there is a super-being now DavidW: I'm trying to find what I'm subscribing to if I sign on to your line of thought. blip: If it has always been there then what is your point? "akejay": I think maybe it's already here, in this room. DavidW: How will we know when there is a super-being? CliffJ: Or if there is, it just is a traditional society DavidW: Michael for Super Being! "akejay": When he introduces himself. ommm: shhhhhh CliffJ: I think we'd know it when the whole is able to make decisions omar: how much of this is a revisit to notions like the invisible hand of the market? CliffJ: Democracy takes us somewhat in that direction Hypatia: or she sally: this could very well be Buddhist philosophy DavidW: How do you envision the decision-making? "akejay": The whole does make decisions. It's called Government. blip: Can we ever know "akejay": It might also be the Market. CliffJ: But otherwise it's been a more organic growth process of multiple individual components sally: and radical left wing dissenters? zg: What decisions would it be making? DavidW: Brains make decisions very differently than societies do. Will our way of making decisions evolve as dramatically? zg: and who would the decisions affect? blip: ? blip: How so DavidW DavidW: Will we vote? Vote with our feet/wallets/lobes? Just "know" what's right? CliffJ: Right: by the way, as I said to Michael, I am actually NOT a proponent of the "global brain" school clack: we will have created a body of knowledge topcat: east and west have very different views of the role of the individual versus the society
CliffJ: I think it's a metaphor which is being driven far too far from it's denotation "akejay": Maybe Government is distributed to the maximum degree... topcat: maybe that will help to inform us further DavidW: Blip, I mean that brains don't really make decisions. People do. But the way I decide whether to eat a peach is different than how society decides to legalize peaches. I way factors. Societies vote or some such. CliffJ: David's asking just the right questions CliffJ: Right now, whatever integration is going on is being motivated by economics nomad: Dictatorship of the Global Brain, it has always already been us . . . and if you are not with us, you are what? DavidW: way=weigh. Darn! ommm: David is on the Cluetrain CliffJ: I can't conceive of life without my cell phone and web DavidW: Woohoo! "akejay": I can remember... CliffJ: You vote everyday just by logging in CliffJ: As long as that continues to advantage you, you will nomad: When do we know it is "us" and not just some other them? topcat: are we supposed to believe that statement Cliff? DavidW: Yes, logging in makes a difference. But it blip: Can we really understand the inner workings of the brain to make such a decision topcat: that you wouldn't survive without the connection? DavidW: Yes, logging in makes a difference, but it's not voting, and it nomad: What is you are not logged in? CliffJ: Sorry, that's metaphorical DavidW: 's not making group decisions. clack: can we dance today, omm? nomad: Like the book of names that the Mormons keep. CliffJ: I agree wholeheartedly that VERY few systems show the properties needed for even APPROACHING "superbeinghood" peanut: sounds good clack "akejay": The Book of all Books comes close. DavidW: So, Cliff, you agree that the question of what's a metaphor and what isn't is central to what you're saying? It's where I get hung up... CliffJ: And the ability to make collective MEASUREMENTS, DECISIONS, and then ACTIONS is what indicates that blip: Is a slime mold a superbeing? clack: !!!!!!!!!!! topcat: he likes that slime mold CliffJ: David: Yes, entirely. I find the metaphorical slipperiness exciting, but dangerous topcat: and apparently for good reason! CliffJ: Slime molds HAVE been put into this capacity for a long time, as the transition from single to multi-cellular, the first meta-being DavidW: I agree that *metaphorically* the collection of the Web is something more than just a whole bunch o' nodes "akejay": There's that slime mold again. Bruce Damer loves that analogy. virt: but "control" and "evolution" are literal blip: What about herds of animals? CliffJ: We mean something very specific by "control" blip: What is that? virt: yes virt: elaborate DavidW: But I don't know that we have yet developed the language -- the poetry -- for understand this new type of "thing" that is us on the Web. CliffJ: Flocking behavior has also been studied, but is more akin to a complex dynamical system made up of parts than a whole new organisms "akejay": We're Boids? CliffJ: Beehives and other eusocial organisms are a better metaphor topcat: yes, we're discovering that poetry is very important in virtual worlds CliffJ: I(Yes, boids) In some sense, a beehive is ONE organism blip: How bout a forest? clack: eusocial peanut: CJ: Why the need for such super consciousness? I don't think the world evolved with so peanut: much awareness "akejay": The beehive is a Mormon metaphor, too. blip: How bout a tribe of people? Hypatia: Bucky called it poetically a "pattern integrity" CliffJ: The world DID evolve with it: culture is the shared construction of meaning topcat: good, H. virt: defintion thrilling cj CliffJ: David: I agree about the need for a new language, perhaps we can help develop it topcat: veery nice blip: go for it blip: hehe "akejay": Let's start with the Names of the Nodes.
DavidW: May I suggest that the Web is better understood as a conversation than as a social organism? DavidW: The Names of the Nodes Shall Be Soylent Green, um People! Hypatia: a "scenario universe?" (good ol' bucky again) "akejay": "Markets are a conversation." virt: ok! topcat: the repartee being a key? CliffJ: Yes, certainly. "akejay": Hesse's little glass beads. It's so beautiful. blip: what is a conversation CliffJ: I think the process actually began with writing: CliffJ: The ability to "off-load" ones cognitive content into external tokens DavidW: A conversation is people talking. I don't mean it technically or metaphorically. virt: conversation is linguistics and then Wittgenstein etc etc CliffJ: Has simply accelerated today to the point where a qualitative difference is being made blip: Define conversation though "akejay": Symbolism predates writing. DavidW: No, virt, I disagree. Conversation is people talking. CliffJ: Well, if you mean it literally, then I think the Web is much more than a conversation zg: Is this a conversation or a debate? "akejay": Could Koko be symbolic? It's debatable. topcat: a shared energy/information/feeling field? clack: a dance blip: Go topcat DavidW: Wittgenstein had the wit to see that language arises from and can only be understood in conversation. CliffJ: Or as a game virt: yes, that's my point CliffJ: But then you DO mean "conversation" metaphorically DavidW: Yes, the Web is more than conversation. It is also a "transaction space" and a new broadcast medium. But what's distinctive of it and really really important about it, and attractive about it, is that we get to speak in our own voices about things we care about. CliffJ: Or at least generalized beyond two people making verbal exchanges blip: Which came first the language or the conversation? topcat: You guys should get together more often... DavidW: Historically which came first? Probably conversation. But who knows? Hypatia: the gesture came first CliffJ: I think they clearly came together blip: hmmm blip: clearly DavidW: Probably people pointing at the same bison. Yes, Hypatia, I agree: gesture. topcat: quest for fire, anyone? CliffJ: Or, rather, there is plenty of proto-conversation in non-human animals Hypatia: the song too "akejay": What gestures did the plankton make? zg: can you have a conversation in gestures? DavidW: And gesture is a turning to a shared world. Gesture is the basis of culture in Cliff's sense (a sense I like, btw) blip: is gesture conversation? topcat: the evolution of the soft face suggests that facial expression came first, something we really miss in avavatr CliffJ: Here I invoke semiotic concepts to talk about signs in general DavidW: We have conversations in gesture all the time. CliffJ: Words, gestures, and pictures are all kinds of signs, with different properties clack: plankton glow in the dark "akejay": What is a word but a gesture of the vocal cord? DavidW: Plankton bob. CliffJ: Plankton appear to type a great deal ommm: yes, it's time for the plankton bob... "akejay": They rub up against each other in meaningful ways... ommm: after the fireworks of this sparkling conversation ommm: we can go into the hot tub and float DavidW: Look, I don't think we need to analyze conversation in great depth. You all know what conversations are. We're having one now. Hypatia: tone, emotional cues -- ala Clifford Geertz's wink blink phenom in thick description ommm: as plankton in the big belly of cyberspace CliffJ: Yes, I want to go! "akejay": Let's float! CliffJ: How do I get there, can I teleport? topcat: lezzgo boss nomad: The movements, lurches, and spasms of the market . . . it's song . . . it's conversation(s) . . . The market itself has been posited as a kind of superbeing, more intelligent than democracy. ommm: can you see the black circle (orb) with the plankton in it? DavidW: My point is: if the Web can be understood as conversational, then we're not tempted to look for some type of "thing" that we constitute together on the Web. We're not a super-being. We're in a conversation. CliffJ: Yeah nomad: Isn't the present market, getting ever more electronic, and intelligent, an even more evolved and powerful superbrain than the general Internet. ommm: okay, just click on that orb topcat: hear the creaking of the whale's Song? ommm: and you will be at the Float Zone
CliffJ: Seeya, I'm gonna float "akejay": Hey, tha Market picked Britney Spears. DavidW: The Market is my shepherd. I shall not wander. virt: yes, dw, conversation is better than superbeing and global brains ommm: okay, either Join me or click on the plankton floater topcat: did we lose Cliff? ommm: i'm righ tnow under it nomad: Oh my . .. ommm: cliff went to float DavidW: The truth is that I've been flogging the "conversation" metaphor (or literalism, I can't even tell any more) since our godd*mned book came out in February and I'm sick of it. ommm: join us at the planton node "akejay": It's plankton communication. topcat: hell akejay.. ommm: (to DavidW) join me topcat: hello oo CliffJ: David: I agree. The question is: when does a conversation become something more? clack: weird! "akejay": Reminds me of the Far Side cartoon, where the scientist invents the dog language translator...
DavidW: i did, i still have no idea where i am. oh well. topcat: and... CliffJ: A "conversation" has terra-formed the planet ommm: (to Hypatia) can you choose a plankton avatar? teukros: try spinning left; the plankton move in orbits "akejay": All the barking translates to "Hey, hey, hey!" blip: Wouldn't conversation be a key to evolutionary combinations and a form of interactive structure topcat: lol ommm: please choose a plankton avatar "akejay": Do you know any dogs? Everything more sophisticated they say with olfactory symbolism in urine. ommm: Avatar menu at top, choose one of them clack: what is that blue thing? ommm: now bob slowly, tapping the Plus / Minus on the numeric keypad topcat: hey, when i spin around in the dark, it looks like you guys are moving, not me. Hahahahah! ommm: try to hang together like fishes clack: yeah! "akejay": Which reminds me, has anybody read "Jacobson's Organ"? teukros: yes, topcat, everyone moves around you ommm: yes you can also spin (arrow, arrow..) topcat: but that's a reversal! DavidW: Topcat is my shepherd. I shall not wander. (But bobbing's ok.) ommm: and wriggle... CliffJ: How do I wriggle? teukros: it's a good thing i practiced the trill on the piano topcat: left and right, real fast ommm: wriggle= short left arrow, right arrow DavidW: You redefine what you said and claim you meant something else ... :-) topcat: hahahah "akejay": I'm pressing 'flap' but nothing happens! CliffJ: What do you mean? I mean that "conversations" have tangible results, things get built, earth gets moved ommm: visual delights!!! CliffJ: I'm wriggling, boss! DavidW: What do I mean? At this point, probably absolutely nothing. Just verbally bobbing. Immigration Officer: You are being joined by DavidW. ommm: fun! Immigration Officer: You are being joined by teukros. topcat: ah, the silent spaces of avatars at bob.... ommm: you guys have been just great!!! CliffJ: Oh, come on! I am serious: collections or organisms exchanging information, whether cells in a multicellular organisms or people in a society, create something tangibly new and different CliffJ: Exchanging material also, of course ommm: this has been a glorious finale to our summer musings ommm: thank you both so much for your great spirits topcat: yeah! teukros: yes clack: we have exchanged virt: right on clack: we have also gained CliffJ: David and I can keep on fighting . . . ;- teukros: great conversation ommm: wonderful! DavidW: Hugely fun. Cliff, tremendously stimulating. Great to meet you. And you all. Hypatia: thanks -- good musings -- very granular topcat: I was serious when I said you 2 should meet more often.... teukros: thanks to all ommm: we love the spirit of inquiry and conversation- both! "akejay": Crunchy! CliffJ: Thanks to everyone as well, it's been a pleasure spans1: slap slap slap nomad: it has been "mind" expanding. clack: clap clap clap ommm: you've all been good plankton too!! spans1: that planktoplaus DavidW: flap flap flap "akejay": Clap virt: claps claps CliffJ: I'll never forget my afternoon in the plankton tank blip: Alright! Hypatia: applause to great guests DavidW: Cliff, let's duke it out over serious beers. CliffJ: Sure, or what do plankton eat? CliffJ: Nothing, I guess, DavidW: sunlight topcat: each other!!! CliffJ: Hey, there's no sunlight, we're all dead! ommm: you're all floating in the log files ommm: and you look great!! CliffJ: Good afternoon, and goodbye topcat: bye bye1 "akejay": Thanks! virt: thanks ommm and all c u all again i hope, bye, bye topcat: ! ommm: bye bye, and thanks so much for coming blip: see ya ommm: bye all clack: bye all blip: blip blip Hypatia: bye ommm: memorable event, thank you all nomad: bye! ommm: see you soon, yup
Key to Avatar Identities: CliffJ=Cliff Joslyn DavidW=David Weinberger ommm=Michael Heim MalibuLabRat=Jerry Isdale blip=Michael Fields clack=Ruth Askren virt=Johan Elmfeldt Hypatia=Bonnie DeVarco artemis=Rita akejay=Jake peanut=Christina Valentine topcat=Tobey Crockett sally=Jenny Tran Singularian=John Smart, LA, CA teukros=Tom Mancuso zg=Penny Twining nomad=Matthew Sloly Hermes=artificial bot dio=Christophe Cornubert ClaudiaU=Claudia Uchoa omar=? |
