about abstraction or abstracts and memories or sort of

freedom?

It just occurred to me that it seems like for being able to recall information, we tend to use ways of keeping links to memory abstract. To be crude, an outline of a person is enough for recalling their being in a certain place. No need to recall what they were wearing until the question becomes relevant.

In that sense, requirements to be very exact and care for details, should be in link with relevance, a political question, no?

I wonder if there is a question of sharedness in society from the sense of common way of abstration or even of being (with) abstracts..?

hummm.. an attempt to blog from quitter?

comments? –> produce the effect because people know am trying to get a certain effect?
a few seconds ago from web
Reply 3009381 Delete
ahanon ahanon

#comments? -> to play, to game while attempting to appear Not playing nor gaming? Or if am clear re stating for effect, then am unable to ->
about 2 minutes ago from web
Reply 3009380 Delete
ahanon ahanon
#comments? to do/say stuff for effect, not for what they are. “am hungry” to affect one’s thinking – while not actually Be hungry, is–>

google – fit for tyranny?

Authoritarian, often tyrannical, sometimes fascistic and by default oppressive operations/organisations, tend to seek legitimacy. Legitimacy minimises the cost of control as it creates an obeying population that follows the rules from their own volition.

A bit of a research of history, might conjour up how, for example, fascist tyrannies, would excuse behaviour by claims for the general benefit of most people, medically correct as it might be, to advance a legitimisation of their rule. (..as the regime can paint itself as a fair system of governance for all..)

Following the Nazies – see link above – we have google. An authoritarian and tyrannical operation that seeks to control, oppress opposition (eg buying companies/patents and using size-might to scare and push others out of its way, as well as using its public of users for profit without providing a meaningful controlling mechanism, or even a rout to it..) and minimise users input to channels it prefers for its own profiteering – hence we get google’s attempt to convince people it rather fancies them being healthy and fit.

How to distinguish between a google fitness app and, for example, a potential NHS one?
They might do the same thing, no?
Well, they might. However, there are, in my view, a few crucial differences:
* with nhs, so long as its public, the data given about your life will stay between you and yourself. Google, this way or another, fancies you telling a genuine story about yourself for gaining ad revenues.
* with nhs, as long as its public, we get some measure of social, cultural and political interaction based on dialogues, not just power, and the possibility of more democratic routs for our health.
* with nhs, we get to have the possibility of being a part of a process that, because it actually cares, might add/delete options according to medical findings – not as the case is with an operation such as google – where it might very well be hard to tell when financial concerns re options of fitness might begin and a genuine medical issue begins. This is precisely because the concern, like in a tyrannical regime – is for ruling people, not for benefiting people.

revolving clarity? art? else? what?

How come an image that depict a network, might – or might not – be art in my view. However, stuff – an image or word, a sound or a scent, a thought or a sand grain – that might use network to be how it is, that the thought will be made of network not just depict a network, will be for me considered possibly art.

I am indeed – sort of – enamoured by the stuff, objects, or other encapsulated elements, which by questioning their own being, folding onto themselves and being who and how they are, rather than pretending to be other stuff, seems kind of like art for me.

I think that this is wrong. Not sure exactly why nor how at the moment, however if we check art as a process of practice, if we check art as a technology in and of imagination, if we check art as a cultural catharsis that as a practise rather than a fetish – where the fetish is indeed Hiding the practice because it creates an hierarchy that in fact isn’t by working for the end object Fetish etc. – and if we check art as a sequence and strategies, then the focu8s on manifested materialities and objects is, errr, mistaken because it is unable to Be its own premise.. (at least in my mind..)

Lets try to qualify the last statement:

If we have a contextual work/object/process-element of art, say a urinal. The argument says that it is art, partly at least, because the very alteration of context, that process, the very materiality of context alteration – is the evident element in the process. Hence the object is not entertaining – eg attempts to depict a known image via urinal re-arrangement/s – nor is it a urinal anymore, and the very usage of context as a cultural language material via the urinal object – is indeed what makes the urinal art. (at least art as well as a function-able urinal..)

The other element here is ofcourse the context in itself, the claim that by altering the context into a culturally defined Art environment, then the urinal is indeed art.
Well, it’s a fair claim, however, I think that the argument here can live with both ideas, that its the context which makes X art or not, and that the very direct usage of the materiality it is made of – eg cultural context – the object gets a status which wasn’t there before the alteration.

(ouch this reads heavy.. 🙁 )

I think this works well and dandy so long as indeed the focus is on some sort of end products and the question of value is attached to genuine uniqueness as a provider/generator of meanings. The same way a watch that told the time to your great great granny might be of some value – for someone – that is more than being “just a watch”, an object that went through some sort of “cultural initiation process” might gain a value and uniqueness beyond its daily meanings. As with the granny watch, if that granny Did not acknowledge any link to the person bestowing the value, if she went: all my descendants are shite, I will get rid of them if I could and am divorcing them all in advance!!” – perhaps the said watch would have a slightly different value..?

Indeed, I think that perhaps the room inside the elephant here is that of meanings. In a sense, an image of a face made by urinals – or some network material pretending to be something else by depicting stuff like sunsets – might have something in common, is exactly because of some drive towards meanings. Indeed, the value alteration of the urinal is for ability to bestow meanings.. ..and meanings, if they are all or an element in the focused sequence, are made of and for being other than what and how they are. The word meaning – is just a sound sequence. To mean something, “meaning” had to go through processes that make it something other than just a sound collection.. A confabulative process.

if we say that art has this rather meta contextual element, one that renders stuff as art through the process of Being the activity that makes the stuff? e.g. network art, context art, concept art, etc are of art only If a given work is made of the very processes it is being critical of..

Hence the value of the urinal is exactly from its ability to be meaningful, to gain stuff that isn’t being a urinal despite being made of a urinal – Being Not a urinal. Like the image of a face made from urinals being urinals that pretend being Not urinals..

In that sense, it might be argued that, from a practice with objects point of view, the usage of props is in sort of a dialogue with the notion of materiality.. However, am saying to myself that if props are the language, perhaps that approach should be propy rather than use props in ways that obscure it..(?)

so.. what is missing? a sort of meta questioning of the process? a critique of being a given object made of a given process

non recepe from which to search type of sequences, waves, and other searches?

an apple?
ginger?
rhubabhab?
hot chilli?
coffee?

All these are the ingerients of my current breakfast. I could claim them to come under breakfast recepe category for which the abstraction could be of food, time linked with body waking and/or following a rest/sleep and with the intent of getting stuff to last for a while..

This is an abstraction – there can be Other Breakfast abstractions. Like ones more concerned by the actual day time? (eg other lingo where breakfast is a concept tied with day time/s)

Here’s a specific abstraction – tsunami physics – http://earthweb.ess.washington.edu/tsunami/general/physics/characteristics.html – the abstract physical elements in tsunami contexts..

This isn’t therefore The absraction – or abstraction process – ala modernist kind. A process and indeed a practice towards – not from – a certain ultimate, the red of all reds, the object of all objects, the process of all processes, etc..

Indeed, I’ll claim that in mind anything is an abstract – once places as such..

How to place hot chilli as an abstract?

Perhaps when its a hot chilli, any will do, rather than a specific jalapino?

And jalapino?

Sure, can be the abstract from which other jalapinos come from.

What might be the abstract of being a jalapino abstract? how it differs from being a non abstract jalapino?

I think its the being in a sequence, a batch, a certain whole that operates, evolves and aquires a present status which requires some sort of jalapino rather than other chilli hotty types?

This way, it can be imagined that:
cold night memory geographically linked with a supermarket distribution, collidingly linked* with a person’s time and whether reaction, hot jalapino chillies, cheap honey and ginger?

This allows someone to take a few elements and place in a different imagination – and/or search from them.
eg
colliding link between random numbers generation process and a particular day-time with a memory-link from jalapino peppers.
..and this can be abstracted from – eg just chilli pepers, in a different search sequence – no?

The question, if the above is positive, is how these search sequences might be approached critically. How one can tell, yes this sequence, and maybe another because it has a problem..

* collidingly linking is an example of an abstract that might require a link to its sequence/s?

OK..

Here’s an argument:
a liquid container of material X colliding with a liquid container of material Y (x and y are different yet breakable materials) smooth linked with an image of same material based containers colliding but not breaking.
Now – why an image of, rather than smooth-linked? (why smooth-linked at all, but that is not for here.. I think..)
Lets talk just about the way using the examples as samples for thoughts..
So..
For me the “image of” is in fact a question of adding time to the process of making the sequence, linking sequence materials – eg, words with photos, and a documentation of activities as part of the search sequence.
However, why does it need the Actual – or an actual – photo?
Why does it not simply require something like: ( time, documentation, not breaking) for objects to collide with

abstraction/s note/s +- 0 =

baka evolution development and stupid?

Baka, as the unregistered conflation, might be in evolution/development? Or stupid?

Some people, while referring to evolution, imagining the process in developmental terms. Hence the expectation is of Betterment. The car, shoes, software, etc, of the latest – or contemporary version – should be better than what was before? Or when I mention something evolved into stuff we wish it wasn’t – people tell me that it has De-Evolved – with idea that evolving is for better.

So when development comes in, how is it different to evolutionary processes in that context?

The other element that can be is the notion of time arrow? Like if evolving is in time, then time seems to have a linear progression, not the chaotic – UN-predictable (though some might dispute) – process of evolution?

Development is, in my view, a def element in evolution, however is not in and of itself the evolutionary process.. In development, we place sequences of intent, expectation, outcomes, speculations, etc.. Sure, stuff that comes up affects more chaotic processes of evolution.. However, development, perhaps due to the intentionality – real or not – involved, seems to be inspired by evolution..

The other question that these bring, or a question that seems to stem from these, is that am writing about evolution and development as processes – not practices. As if they are some elements that do not have a self critical process? How do I know?

useless senseless illogical logic?

intervals in survey aesthetics?

i wonder if the interval(?)/link(?) between surveys’
questions
the results/outcome
with the
non asking of the question
– is, in effect, the doing of survey aesthetics..?

These sort of 3 elements dynamics? like a 3 way love stories?

if and (its?) time?

if as a logical operator is part of a sequence that tends to bring a then – time – and its exceptions, else.
If XX Then ^^ Else its <> and so on..

The Then is in itself a time element. In other words, its an operation that “waits” for its time to show its face. If will follow the if, and in return, comes before the If when described as a condition. The fact we have a Then makes the If to be a condition for the Then instruction.

If condition(being-asked-for-a-drink) then reply to the entity asking, else – continue wondering about Ifs..

The if in a search sequence is – i think – a different If because it doesn’t have the Then or Else to make it a condition. It doesn’t operate as a condition but rather like – i think – a suggestion.

If suggestion(being asked for a drink)?

Its a demon that keeps looping and can break only by encountering another demon – another If search sequence. In that sense, its a suggestion that its being is only a suggestion. It doesn’t seek to be conditioning **for** something, inevitably something outside of the condition, but to suggest of being. The being requires self critique that is an If. If ab, If am hungry. if am hungry, if am hungry, etc.. It keeps suggesting being a suggestion.

In that sense, the If search sequence is an imagination claiming to Be a whole by simply being It Self. Freeing an imagination – a suggestion – from requiring another element to be fulfilled, alive – the imagination can suggest freely, fearlessly – as it is, by being a search from – is alive.

Though perhaps, am saying that because i kept going “if imagination” – for too long?

55k core under strategic violence?

Disney used 55k core computer to render its new 90 odd mins visual take-away entertainment.
Think perhaps it might be fair to speculate:
* Most people will not experience the difference between films and their render core powers.
* Some people will experience the difference.
* Most and some people will be awed by the disney usage of such a computing power.
* The ability to use so much power could, in general, be perceived as a legitimising force, an investment that gives legitimacy to instant ownership, authorship and quality claims – hence rendering in 55k also rendered the film being “an official” narrative of which other, sub, fan, and other linked narratives may stem from?
* Disney hopes to claim back the money through sales which will be boosted by the very acceptance of the violent power performance described above. (eg, the violent rejection of any other, by the theatrics of 55k rendering. Theatrics because for many its a show who’s substance is only as a show, rather than the real experience of 55k rendered visual quality..)

Well.. Maybe am wrong and it is afterall a happy-valley disneyfied life, and am just too flesh and blood to get it?

weathering storms or storms or stormified stormy storms?

The guardian informs of “disruptions” for untold number of job lovers’ on the way to realise their dreams this morning – by the un sportive tail end of a hurricane they call “gonzalo”.

Storms and economic linked activities have a fair bit in common. When the capitalist economy has to fold a bit every now and again, its called a storm, a bit of a rough sea, an economic blizzard, a downpour, a tsunami, etc. (ok last bit is not entirely weather – but you get the idea, yes?)

These capitalistic “tough weather” periods, despite the fact they certainly disrupts lives – not just working lives/moments – of most people linked to such “economic weather events”, it seems the main stream of capitalist societies rather digest these as the storm blowing its ways now just outside my window.
However, when it comes to human rights, working people’s rights, pay, private lives (eg with families, as in parenthood leave, etc.) – the analogy to weather breaks suddenly. Then we do not have Nurses pay brings a storm calling for financial reform and democratisation of health – or something in that spirit, more succinctly written. But instead we get stuff about Nurses strike and disrupt.

Perhaps just like the victims of rough non metaphorical weather, when they claim the right to have socio-cultural and political weather-based moments – even that possibility is being possesed and reserved by and for power alone.

1 single pixel in mind?

Noticed this link headlined something to the tune of 1 pixel camera.

Reminded me an old idea of 1 px portraits. The idea was to reduce portraits to single pixels, basically.
The link – not the content – gave me the idea that perhaps someone went a step further and made a camera that takes only one px images. (This one is about using single pixels to construct details pictures/images – as far as I seem to understand..)

However, this episode re-ignited the single px in mind.. Perhaps think/imagine this as a creature that keeps taking 1 px images of stuff? Am thin king prhpas a sort of if search sequence that produces single px to live from. (ie search..)

Perhaps operations that search from single pixelising life?

If all is not a single pixel
if all for creature is a single pixel
If single pixel is not an abstraction but just a random pixel
or if a single pixel is an abstravtion
or if a single pixel is a concentration

if single pixel is a random sample

if 1pxBeing recalls all pixels

if 1pxBeing size is in proportion to pixels

hummmm – i think this requires ranges and i do not know which ranges to take.. perhaps to begin with, ranges from intervals because intervals operate as sequences from un expected elements to be introduced into a frequency… I think of it like joining a stream of cars/people/entities – one is waiting for the interval between,, no?

states, organisationss, times and crimes?

A state is an organisation, just like a mafia, a religion, a corporation, etc. are. However, perhaps “state” organisation has a slightly different dna than the mafia’s?

On the face of it, saying that states are just like any other organisations, seems cool. However, I think there is a certain difference for states, something perhaps anarchists – a bit like me – and other state questioning streams – might fancy baring in mind – that the state in order to Be the state organisation, has to present itself as an operation for All. The reason that a monarch/president/dictator/etc. can and do fancy themselves ruling Over people and Expecting these people’s loyalties, is because the State is for all. If you are of the state, you have a certain obligation for all people that link – or you might want to link – with that state. Like corporations have obligation to “investors” – States have a certain obligation towards its dominions, obligations that take account of crossing all social constructs – even if that crossing is for emphasising a certain social structure. This, for example is very different from a religion, where a dominant religion will not just give certain preferences to X religion, but also will not claim to represent members of the said discriminated religion. (e.g. Slave owners’ states in the US claimed to be beneficial for slaves… Turkey, Saudi-Arabia, Iran, India, Israel, Pakistan, etc. – these are states where members of less dominant religions are outsiders in the sense that the religious state is limited in its claims of legitimacy over members of non-dominant religions. eg, Some rules might not apply to that members of religious minority, like conscription of muslims in the israeli army. Or handling of finances in muslim countries where interest is “un-islamic” hence people use proxies, members of other religions..

Just like the mafia, tribal, corporate, and religious operations have to have restrictions on members that then affect others around them and turns into a power struggle – rather than discursive and civil attempting one – because the organisations are rivals for one another, their reason to Be does not include a variety of people they have under their domain – so the state is for the entirety of people within a specific geographical area. Where states are Allowed to be like single group oriented organisations is War…

In war, I guess, states and religious, terror, economical, and other swuch organisations, elements meet.

There must be some writings about the states’ operational differences from others.. In a critical rather than some of the glary eyed texts by 19th century European nationalists?

Huummm.. Here’s perhaps a contemporary example:

In the uber sorry bloodbath of Syria, it seems that the Kurdish faction gets to recruit non Kurdish people because its slightly wider that a single religious affiliation way of ruling..

a hydra-loop?

A loop that generates heads of its own? Is that a hydra loop? How does it operate? (why did I begin with the name rather than description?!!??)
Any how..
Was considering the students at uni. Many seem to be fairly focused on training for a job – rather than getting educated in art/journalism/media/etc.. The focus is on wanting to get a job, do a task or two – how to do that and get away with doing the job…

Because universities try to “listen” – ie hear selectively, and do what the majority rather fancies, when it comes to possible funds increase – when most students say that they want training, its more entertaining, unis oblige.

Or attempt to, as much as they might be able to get away with..

The demands for training rather than education is in the social culture because it seems legit. People think its uncool to call someone a son-of-a-bitch without a legitimate “reason”, or to be very loud every 3am, etc – however, it does seem acceptable wanting live for getting a job. It seems a legitimate aim to have a job – almost any job, even one that kills others, like McJob, etc. – however the point here is about the “getting a job” in general.
It seems to me that once people attempt to do the process of getting a job both a focus and a cultivation – ie, how to do the process better – we get an acceptance by default of the very question to focus from – how to get a job and do this process more refined?

If the Uni as part of a culture that fancies getting a job over developing, evolving and generally cultivating critical, questioning, challenging, fearless, imaginative, stumbling, awckward, quirky, wrong, and knowing not kind of processes – then there are less and less people to question, and/or know how to question – on the level of Uni-wide pedagogical percpective and strategy – the very process of Job only focus.

Hence a loop. The culture that cultivates just think about a Job, fascilitates non questioning that fascilitates – or just links(??) – with non-questioning, etc..

The hydra?
Probably because of a sense that the loop has multiple heads, multiple manifestations that come from its own energies.
(Hence the Hydra can lose heads and regenerate others..?)

rawaway

Am interested in this “rawaway”.. To beging with, i think it seems like something that with a few clues will provide a certain explanation about what it might be. To raw away?
However, because it is taken from (d)rawaway, we get an action – of abstraction, based on the literal meaning of abstraction – to draw away. (ab – away, and tract – draw)

Now, once there is a constellation of links in the open, instead of a solution to rawaway, I think we get more questions. Not just more question, but ones that are interesting precisely because they interlink and provide no answer..

Am really unsure how I feel with the elements of meaning here..