Critical theory of the holding dialects of sociological control of the underground.
With the abuse of IP laws, and the way of tech is controlled with out the ways these ideas are made with our own desires.
Critical theory of the holding dialects of sociological control of the underground.
Resentment and otium of the aristocratic class.
This not a dive of an aristocrat or a nilosophy (Ni as in hate)
Apart from misinformation of LLMs and diffusion models on two pages (I'd recommend Nicolas d'Varrreal's A Soul of a New Type for the full epistemology). With collaboration, understanding this tech is possible. Daniel Tutt Interviewed him.
Pretty impressive using psychology and Freaud and Lack, including Hagel. I've seen such modes of thought as enlightening as I explore the manner of idea/expression. With that, such is the commencement of abstract and concrete making of the mind. It's nestled its way through multiple theories of over the political map and other ways that jigger around.
So this one is going the typical dialectical materialism manner of monistic creation. I do like to think mental states can be both independent and dependent, varying on the modes of production. So this fits with the idea that with a complement to the complement of film at the end, it's Slavoj Žižek's Perverts Guide to Ideology extra.
This is total independence with me at my workstation and wordplay right now.
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
Even out of the bounds of our epistemic enterprise of our academia, the main road's status motivations, and incentives still persists.
" Everybody is fishing for status, let nobody tell you otherwise " some Dragon Odendo, altered quote, probably. Well, Transcend, for that matter. By junction of there engagement. Social is the proceeding semiotic of economic, that's made of exchange value and set - price. Price, meant to stop haggling by the Quakers. Guess this is a frank confessional on state-craft. Examining ideologies and then moving back into diplomatic entertainment. This will be the most labelist piece, and all these are not to be pressures as I circulate through the ideological forces around my time and place.
DIPLOMATIC ENTERTAINMENT, even that has contradictions, don't you see? Yet here we go with another narrativising pull. As a host! Yet State-craft opinion is something for those who never tire of it.