jerry’s brain – algo ish.. clean ish – here’s my brain – pick.. see it

maria’s brainpickings – love ish – literature ish – i’ve been picking brains… see them here

hameed’s glossary – perhaps a more linear (and dancible) version of jerry’s..? as he seeks the maria’s heart of the matter: love..?

me – combo of two/three – at least with chip… but an ordinary 99% er’s… not really a writer .. not really an algo er… not really highly connected to people.. but a rev of everyday lifer… just living..leaving a trail.. literature was pre internet .. w hyper text … into brains..

one of fav sites/ie’s for well.. ambiance.. is Amy‘s: http://www.whoisamy.com/.. probably only one i’ll add for visual/experiential ness of going to site.. as i’m not even sure.. if we’re all living a nother way.. we’ll spend much of the day going to sites.. (only because now we often spend too much of the day perhaps.. trying to be someone else.. chasing/clinging to things outside us..rather than listening deeply to self/others.. rather than being.. i don’t know.. just flapping here.. who knows..) not that it wouldn’t be an option.. because it’s a great way to get to know someone.. dig into what you’re curious about..
_________so.. i’m dreaming of a dance: where thinking/connecting/journaling/reading/documenting/sharing/listening .. via self-talk as data.. can hear each other enough.. to move together.

________

________

________

________

________

section from document everything page on ie’s/prototypes:

a prototype

what if there was another way. to lifelog. to host life bits. to craft a commonplace book. one that tech facilitated. freeing us up to live. 100% of our day. documenting/stacking more than ever before, in the internet of this-ness/the-what-it-is ness/haeccities.. while taking less time/effort from us. 

Instead of the  popular term, “the internet of things,” which implies a network of physical objects, (Benjamin) Bratton prefers the more esoteric sounding, “internet of haeccities” which would include objects, but also concepts and memes, addressable at the same level, but at multiple scales, through the same system.  “Scales blur and what seemed solid becomes fuzzy. Inevitably we see that any apparently solid scale is really only a temporary state of resolution.”

The bottom line, says Bratton: the inherent intelligence of the world could be more self-reflexive in new and important ways.              – d:gp

what if a site/collection such as this, is your/my access into me. crafted ongoingly via tech that listens to me w/out agenda/judgment. leaving a *trail, like a searchable/linkable commonplace-book, for me/you to tap into when/if needed/desired. leaving us freed up (from all the documenting/recruiting/proving/judging/..) to do the thing we can’t not do. in the city. as the day.

• wikipedia style, so that it’s accessible via whatever curiosity you have.
• nothing to prove style, so that i/we-all spend more on being ness than on proving ness.

what if we focused on self-talk as data. where tech takes our curiosities/matterings in, organizes them (deep address ness…), connects them/us. so that i’m not spending my time jumping through hoops and into boxes for you (not a person’s best side), and you aren’t spending your time trying to find me and then wondering/deciding if you should trust me (most people are other people, especially when trying to impress).

*trail: perhaps one much better than this site represents me just now. because tech is good at gathering/searching/connecting too-much ness. and spitting it back out per your preferred style of taking it in, ie: another flavor – jerry’s brain.

other hlb trail ie’s

what if a tech/app/chip we’ve not yet tried, is one that allows us to document everything. and nothing. without time constraints. without worries of privacy/ownership/evidence/identity/control. because all of us are too usefully preoccupied to pay attention (for bad).

what if tech can be a transparent incubator/connector for 7 billion of us. whenever/wherever/however we are. 

deep address ness… leading to whatever. perhaps site as prototype of my brain. perhaps jerry’s brain. perhaps combo of all. whatever dance you choose/personally-fabricate via whimsy. so the manila envelope doesn’t ever have to kill off some of you – tech can handle tons of data.. and call it out/direct/organize it when/where/however needed/desired..

perhaps there are 7 billion different/idiosyncratic languages. each one changing/morphing daily. and the more we let go of controlling/defining that.. the more we can decide if we really need words. and/or the more we’ll be able to stack/shed/document them in a more convivial/useful/humane/haecceity/eudaimonious way.

A different way of looking at the way the computer age evolved is sort of Ada Lovelace’s way which is that computers and humans will evolve symbiotically. They’ll be partners. We will get more intimately connected to our machines and the machines will amplify our intelligence and our creativity will amplify what the machines could do. And we don’t need to try to create robots that’ll work without us. It’s kind of cooler to create this partnershipof humans and technology or as she put it the humanities and engineering.

– Walter Isaacson

document everything. and nothing. even though and because they’re not paying attention. tech can handle the chaos. perhaps 7 billion people usefully preoccupied makes policy/privacy/ownership/identity/voting/money/war/impossible …

..as we know them …irrelevant.