18+ Thoughtpad from a gay couch-sona, uncommercial model for a magical upholstery. Published illustrator. Hobbyist media theorist. Along with WIP sketches and updates. Opinions my own.
Fishing for attention, competing for it, warring for attention, for all to see.
Moral knowledge becomes falsity when the origin raises the pontificators' views the wrong way, and then they lecture.
With a product, service or policy, there's an incentive to lie, generally speaking.
Yet direct response, eliminative materialism, virality, celebrity endorsements – that stuff that I had to hide in the brand world of e-idealism.
Oh marketing, and the infinite regress of anti-marketing, how it manipulates, how it drives us. How it leads us. The lowest comprehension of a stratum.
Reading Susan Haack's coherence, consistency, cogency, congruency, and cohesiveness – don't go overboard! To add that to the crossword mindset of syenchism of 'pragmatics'
I don't know if this is the one hustlers use to dismiss and race to the bottom, yet here we go.
All allowed under the suspension of disbelief and unreality. We are allowed thought patterns with the credence of our monistic attention to the circumstances. These are the elements. That comes from the spectator and for the prosumer spectacle, to the consumption of hegemonic thought. Spotting each point so that the suspension of our own phenomenon reflects the character's mind, our third-person omnipotence.
So he is stuck, within statsis of all things that happen to bring him the torture of the cogs of the lands of wanting to be a anti-woke YouTuber nitpicking pop media's nitpicks.
It got me thinking of this link, of tackling infamous pundits for the sake of it.
Or the saying comes with the commodity relations to our intangible, qualitative attention.
🛋ðŸ’
Oh dear, we've reached the bipartisan hacksmanship of our entertainment nexus, pundits and PowerPoint punditry.
To what extent will these continue with this micro medium of the attention imperative? Everybody, to some extent, is copywriting and advertising to some extent in a contract propertrian.
As with cartooning, the ideas and conceptions adapted to for a new state of creation.
Reduction flatpacking to establish holism with the attempt to move the improvised beats to scenes, to sequences, to acts, to a completed novel. All this relationism, from coherentism to incoherentism, and all those effects rest on the imagined dogmas present under the legalese of fiction.
Being an entertainer, I can only find the concepts of Harlan Ellison's The Glass Teat inspiring to create literary entertainment. This concept aligns with Byung-Chul Han Cognitainment concept with my craft, I seek to make it into the creative commons. I can only assume our old copyright framework aids in this diffuse atomisation, like you said.
With all the cargo culting though.This may be the limits of our meliorism, granted with our social apparatus of these platform capitalists, left to our own devices to raise consciousness.
So I can only think of connection while still at the tension of these commodity relations as an edutainment creative class owning the means of production. Then carry on.
Seeing the normalised advertising and commodifying proffesion left to us, along with the subvertisement. The only thing on these platforms is locked within. It's arguable that with all this automated white-collar work now, it's going to first to go. It's a fascinating subject that came from aristotle of plot:spectcale, Robert Mckhee's argued in one of his craft books there is no distinction.
I guess we will have to move on with commodified para-social relationships from platform to platform. Thx for the talk, been doing my best to inform my praxis while not falling into the pragmatism traps.
More on entertainment, good and bad. I've read about:
Harlen Ellison's The Glass Teat 1+2 And his speech on toilets Byung-Chul Han's The Good Entertainment > Those are goof Robert McKee Character Nicolas D Villarreal a soul of a new type
David Foster Wallace talk on consumerism > mid The Attention merchants : Tim Wu
Neil Postman on Amusing Ourselves to Death and Technopoly. ( I don't know how long those ideas have lasted) >Negative
Inspired by this review of Team America, and comparing it to Rogert Ebert. Both reviews create a paradox on non-contradiction. The editorial and the number of institutions that sneered or the ones that embraced it with the academia's own view.
Despite the vulgarity being on the course with the duo. This has aged generously. If not due to luck, then due to playing the improvisational game of turning what was once a sleeper hit of non-judicial spaces into a cultural touchstone.
So what can I learn? Epistemic luck and being at the right place at the right time is still a thing; you can't count on it though in the studio. Improvisation, planning, overplanning and then the curtailment.
They will always be cheaters and gamers, social media gamers and all that industry plant react stream banality at any polemical tension.
Even now though, these polemists may have become peace-makers or diplomats; I haven't checked on their body of work of the later seasons on an LS mark episode overview.
"I'll promise i will never die" anticlimantic moment.
Unrelated to a peanut calling another viewbotting, yet idk, what Seth says about cheating applies. Along with a dishonest game of publishing out there.
There's a machine learning term confusion matrix, or 'viewbotting service', and it includes spell checkers and the AI detectors not working.
So, even with the variables of all that. Cheating and all, the attempt to short-term to game and opportunities to race to the bottom are always present. Not going to deny. With the terminus of behavioural patterns aligning with thad
Each and every day, OpenAI and grock, these two are the ai companies that suck the most.
It sucks since it's due to the provocateurship, the ones that took an accidental discovery to an annoyance. Is it that when China releases something, Twitter artists (derogatory) throw pretensions and now? Two billionaires act like clueless chickens.
I was comfy scrolling on Substack and needed to write this. This was followed by a Kink by Not Art. A Madame Bovary, I'm going to get put out; the west has this odd, oxymoronic way of for and against.
I know they have their place, including objectification and sexualisation. To the point of unpleasant saturation with Chuck Palahniuk's snuff. Or Lila's bitter short surprise.
Yet is there a conceptual middle? To leave the condescending lack-of-trust Ensmuttification (whatever that means) and the prudish Hays Code of respectability?
Well, you can do plotless porn here, no worries. Aliterate audience will eat it up, reduce literature's serious slowness to consumable short beats then call it a day toll done. Nonliteral moments of satisfaction with the curators of those doing their thing.
No meaningful relationalism, just a mere exchange of physical attrative forces. Of overrated thirstrapping and a one-night-stands. Cohere only
Unless
It's to overlook and own up to the mass market mediocrity, then try to seek something hyper-specific. From Golden Boy to the novels that I mentioned.
Or don't own up to it, the barest duty. It's the internet. Cyberspace can feel like that. No taste or chance. Or commodity relations.
Whatever it is, we are still going to see sex sells, for better or for worse.
The anarchist zines happened, with all the contradictory ideologies along with the
Oh look, an anarchist zine library with all the points of disagreement, yet with preservation of knowledge like the Internet Archive. I'm not sure if I'm going to read them all, yet here it is.
I'm not even an anarchist. Given that these ideas are meant to spread, with my fair share of disagreements, it can get too anti-dom of a sort.
It's all research of a sort not fitting for a microblog. They do share a view of ip law abolition, though.
They may call me tankie, or that term, even though I identify as a hobby sociologist.
Couch Gregor, resolves. Also more Beep Boop because why not. Of all the law terms.
Are they going to know this is extrajudicial? Okay then.
DRM is bad; it absolves civic duty. I have a mind that can informally judge ownership
Ultimately, I have to conclude scraping ought to be public domain. not private equity or government. Any readjusting of IP law to fit their interest will lead to injustice. from the notes, fair use/fair dealing and public domain.
Commercial firms ought to have their copyright reduced. Specifically Disney. Vertical media outlets should not have monopoly power over non-profits and freelance business acts. (Disney does not care about non-profits, it can take a
Protect Public domain, virality is a crapshoot other than the direct response platforms. Celebrity endorsements vertically travel at moments at the algorithm.
Since there's no accepted conventional definition of plagiarism, it can be debated ad infinitum; it's infinitely generative. Conceptually and abstractly. So lawyers are needed for agreements. Yet the agreements themselves can become overwrought, so a handshake deal works best between client relations. (This ain't natural law, hence why the court and lawyers exist )
Keeping the idea of the idea/expression is a useful fiction.
Freedom of expression + Right to oblivion > Copyright. Since state-sanctioned monopolies don't need the first two, since popularity isn't needed. There are cases of unjust profit entitlement/fraud, yet they are always in favour of concentrated industries, so anti-trust first.
That being said, a freelancer can be a case of vulturism, yet there's way more vulturism by Alen Dean Foster and in other cases. Creatives are losing their design rights out of silly clauses. (It's always disney/nintendo.)
Nobody should make a living as a copyright troll, completely. (These are all my unforced opinions.)
As time goes on, we are going to see more indefensible conceptions of the anacho-capitalist concept of self-ownership (If somebody does it, someone else will.) It's simpler; nobody does due to public domain. Non-binding and unforced with not statuatory.
The fun fun fun of the most frustrating arguments on microbloggers. Of the draconian copyright law. oh This too. I feel like this is becoming cope bait. Again, too many bad actors hijacking.
Despite all these notes, I'm still keeping my, possibly last, zine's production untouched.
The first impression may the only thing that matters, when the outsider blocks or pays attention further to the facsimile of the auto-advertisements of social media, something birthed through the direct response mail order posting, from Lester Wunderman.
Is that being deflationist? Is that what they mean by streamlining a heuristic of attention capture?
Well, no one will pay more attention to the first impression of one's work than the creator.
Pop goes the impression, as Satoshi-kun says, experiential to the immediate and the moment of long-term expanse. That's one way to look at it.
Hey, wanna be banal? Want to have no opinion? Want to be nothing?
It's easy money, a sinicure, a cush job.
Merely exist, then wait till death.
What's that? No opinion.
Well, that's what a clerk happens to do, or what happens with low self-esteem.
Sit on the fence, try to be proud, yet not, and take the commodification word too seriously with amoral patterns. There are hills to die on, and the one that claims and ontologises everything and nowhere on a base of solipsism arrives at nowhere, with an opportunistic meliorism with that mentality.
Critical ignoring and certain concepts may not have been important for a book reader who's happened to keep his social media intake low. A qualitative opportunity for banality or a canvas of expression.
Or so that's how it's supposed to go. With the prepositional manners and attitude of.
The image of the thing, the spectacle of the thing, within the manner comes from the in-sync and sync states. Scheduled and paying attention to what's in and out.
Reading self-help advice of crafting crafter for craft. The way of the meta of meta. Self-referential.
WITH NO OWNERSHIP Welcome to the creative commons. Are you surprised?
So much intake of consumption of content with the way it's like it's got that way. Industry complex of condescension on the front page, or am I looking at the mindless entertainment in infront of the front page?
This is the best the place has to offer.
Then you have to protect your attention.
Then with manners it goes. To look in the other places.
All the abstract mentalities, of ideas and non-reality, and all the physical reality. To the amount we take, there are few qualitative degrees that warrant selection.
The physical expression and the ineffable idea/conception stuck within one's head. Unable to be expressed until it hits.
There's that design, with the idea made into a digital and analogue expression.
With that in mind, such a way of trying to squeeze blood from a stone is the dialectical approach that happens.
look at all that logic and physics of what some may call business. if there is a physics to business, there is none in the qualitative side, or the burnt embers
Why I'm against it: it's not fun not having beliefs and sensations.
Crafting crafter of craft. Rather than the unique one. To the way that the origins of things aren't unique.
All that scientism is any ideological commitment and an attempt at universal appeal. Mindset of a production boolean value.
A job of bean counting. A job is a measure of the sunk cost of wrong measurement, of Pavlovian frameworks circulating into themselves.
I wonder how many read and take literature and the formation of themselves and news through the oracles of experts. Then that way, through there insights, it will lead to a new turn of know-how, to being in the know.
The produce with the service to advertising.
With no contingencies, there is no need for any attempt of casualness; they all go and vanish away from the disposable chatrooms.
That 1%, out of a direct response. Could be oblivious, and that's okay.
Even the lonely ones leave on the Substack. Unable to sell a copy, the attention drought is with us. Either stuck in short-form video trying to get engagement.
Comparing it to a hamster wheel. Generating and accumulating raw datum of the insights landing randomly on.
Certain arguments are meant to continue, held in a circle of audience capture.
What's a self-referential feedback loop, self-contained?
Thousands of curses, thousands of crys, thousands of going down the line.
Then there's really than real, or verisimilitude as the likeness of likeness; I prefer respect out of a duty fervour.
The lies, the truths, the ways that they weave when I curate and place a moment of reprieve.
Why do I tip down when I go round an ruminate? Then there's the moment where it's brought back, and I'm stuck within Parkinson's law.
There it goes, down, down and right the way around. I'm looking at something realer than real. Is that what consciousness is within the head of an impossible argument to transcend and to touch an abstract visualisation from the concrete reality? That's hyper-reality.
The little data coarsened with the data made. Then it pops out.
What does it mean within AI? The interactions? The ideas? The way things and virality happen on the internet, what does 'better' mean? What does meliorism matter now?
That's the idea: the one who produced 1000 pots other than one perfect pot was better, apparently. That was the study. It could have reflected on the method or the means to produce more content or the means of production of perfection to make a single piece worse.
Yet with all these word comparatives, is it so that to judge a ship of Theseus, it's remade into that new non-value? So it's made into another status object that will lead into another state of being for another?
Regardless. All iterations, though, are made in that manner; that's been another one.
Depending on the socialised means of production. The artisan city/suburban dweller class.
It's work of art/entertainment paradox working here.
I'm going to twist this post by Seth and Harlan Ellison it up.
There are the vendors who will listen. Hits, specs. These are easy-to-work-with entertainers. Able to connect with.
Then there's the depressed one who hits the spec, yet feels rote. These could be talents.
I mean, that's the difference; the artisan is a creative with tension in the craft.
The craft itself of the depressed feels rote and standardised. These could be tantrums as performances.
An honest hack entertainer delivers on times, understands specifications, yet can go beyond the mechanical performances of eliminative materialism and then attempt an organsim to delight with something remarkable with the client relationship,
What is the best heuristic that respects Occam's razor more likely? Or the deflationist's first impression of creating the finest grape juice? The highest artificially
Appealing to the short, illiterate feedback loops of erotic perversions for the sake of it.
Then there's the logograms, of not exaggerating the exaggerated, to not lead into hyperbolic messages.
Well, the simple first impression does make sense with the direct advertiser it's making that way.
When one can be negliglent to the craft that can't be made.
What does one do? Interact with the the world that's outside ones own imagination?
All the imaginings of another world what it's mean to feal an entertained possibility of non-material becoming, and with that state of entertainment, there's a moment of understanding of another world granted by the vision of the author, into a door of communication of another mind.
Well, telepathy, even with the misreadings and the misinterpretations.
It's all worth it to be part of a society that's made our culture.
Dignify bad artifice of the entertainment argument.
When not playing a character of virtue or pleasure. Reductionistic or holistic.
Deontological for searching for a truth comes.
Then the duty will come for it.
To serve and follow along with others within hermeneutic circles with their shared interpellations and ideological patterns.
With that obligation unbinding, natural organisms cooperate together.
You must come to comprehension with ethics, of utilitarianism, deontology, and even virtue; that's important for any student wanting to understand the humanity that's been built.
Deon in legalism, Utility in vegan ethics, and virtue within wellness/self-help entertainment.
The pornographic libertine Epithumos, and erotics of art.
merely post a transactional porn of sexual capital, Thanks 1dime, that's entertainment clerkism and that's all that bean-counting does. Oh well, It's like I'm taking part of that with my own typing and production of illustrations, gracing amongst commoditised, conventionalised norms of social media, yet it's a matter of understanding and being aware of it.
To create a double life of a jerk-off bubble.
Then there are the other curational accounts that are not straight up porn which help create culture, and they are helpful too; the sfw ones that do it about sensation and the phonomological account of one significant curator of freelance curation can add taste and direction to the culture that nurtures it.
Or the intellectual curated
Directly polemical, not apologising.
This may be where the satirists and direct market happen with demand and the react streamers who happen to move towards the amount of ideological driving and various positions.
That Orson Welles turned his nose up at those snooty naught experts while teasing his audience with his wife in such an anti-plot way. Creatives in the field are faces with an academic system that has failed to overcome the gatekeepers.
So, left to fend for themselves or get lucky, as they say.
With what attempts to hold together, even with a pirate/anarchism, there are attempts to hold a leadership, or they call it Hydra leadership. Yet to be proven.
Can there be fatalism to consumerism and business transactionalism? Of middle class transactions, there are other business models. Cost of living and such. Or the owning-class property relations or the working class relations in; tension as the divide is made.
To pick which fates and destinies is all part of the commitment.
Stephen King said that. Or well, Mr Beast claims to do it, yet the illiterate kids merely watch his business model with his luck.
Story, narratology, all that. Organisation of thought leading into a structure of surprise of play, and not to cheat, with that design intent in mind. To make the unsuspected suspected, or that's what the paradox with fictional suspense belief is. Or the long attempt to play with build-up
Is the be in the leif a aspiration of character and the becoming of that? Virtue ethics-wise.
Cheating with social media'n all that attempt to lower suspense by instant gratification with porn, I've done it myself.
If you know, you know.
The element of surprise and plot, to the modern day, still reminds.
The liar's paradox and all with that chagrin
Here's another Kyle video. With truth/false being explored ( Oh, do recommend that movie)
Better at who? There is no better possibility with the commodity of React streams and thirst traps. The conventions of Meta make a new commodity of various lanes of audience capture hitting the area of iconoclasm.
It's a part of the awareness of the prosumerism of our desires of status. Fed onto such as the cycle of satisfactions of a hedonic treadmill that keeps us going.
For the desire of controlling the ritual of solving a rat race crossword that seems to move somewhere, yet then nowhere.
This ritual from Byung about the virtue or will to uselessness, or unpragmatic emptiness, against the mainstream narrative? Well, peace of mind. The point is to dissect its pragmatic framework of presuppositions and unpersuasive tautologies and then process.
Even progressing or developing to nowhere, the presentism will work now.
Mind was full of dogwhistles. To find honesty within government matters Is a mental toil. Yet I take my energy from trying to console Grandad in his late days.
These times I want to be young and carefree with the childish flying. So I have to make something that ain't Junuphobia.
Disney, with its lapdogs, the embarrassing performances of unintentionality. Obsessing about it now as they deliver blockbusters mystifies the iconoclast within me.
So, hospital bed and smartphone photo sharing with filters and how normalised it's become.
Sigh. Apart from the denialists, or miserablist enforcement, still alive. The ai issue is with my trying to remain a freak away from the hypemonger.
I've yet to read a giant back catalogue that makes me snobby with video games. Time was on my mind, yet so was A Confederacy of Dunces.
Enough of the self-important news made a spectacle. Slap of pain out. Cheddar cheese lunch sandwich.
His consciousness is there, barely registering as I explain my project too. Not sure how this licentious youth I have left contrasts with the stoic, frail tradition left to reconstruct into fiction. What a word! It's normalised. Glad age puts another in a state of mind. I'm silly and occupied with my own domination of 230 of a bill of anti-trust which I'm doing.
Kyle Kallgren likes to be the critic of literary auteurs. Or the art director/producer running the show and their vision.
Yes, even with style, even with genre, one can still be bad.
Axiology does not care about the legalese pf the front cover, the performance the the resonance which follows after, beyond the natural law.
So that from court of law to public. It remains the distinction of low and high still. It can be suspended to serve plenty of stimulation.
Or YOU TEARING ME APART!! LISA WITH SYMBOLIC JUSTICE
video 🔻🛋 on the best/worst over-distributed vanity film. In the spirit of Robert Mcghee. Of the spectacular production and the founderent manueavuring through the industry. Deproffesional within the social media.
(Wonder where Kyles video will be next? I don't follow him.)
