uk is a thief

Linked to the practice of exchaning xdomains/xcountries/xstates giftcards in bus stops.

On Saturday night, while picking some stuff in the local coop – the property keeper accused me of nicking stuff a few days earlier, and “asked” me to get get out of the shop.

I was like: “WHAT??!!”

He was: LOOK, Here’s a photo of you taking Gift-Cards, and you didn’t pay for them!

That was very disturbing to hear. The practice, of x domains giftcards exchanges, has an element of the objects being un-owned.

After a fair bit of discussion with him and whoever happened to be the store manager at the time – it slowly transpired that for the keeper, the problem was Not the fact that no-one actually Owned the cards. The problem, as far as he was concerned was one of Performance. It Looked like something got out of the shop without payment involved.
This resemblance could reflect negatively on him when a supervisor comes to review the cctv images.
At least that is what the property keeper claimed.

We sorted that misunderstanding. However it seemed interesting to pop in on sunday to have a reflective chat about the question of being a property keeper and the x domains giftcards exchange
practice.

Perhaps this might be interesting for people to listen to because there is a wider link – that of the brutalisation of people. The keeper is brutalised by the job – perhaps a perfect illustration of an illegitimate job if one is needed – and in turn brutalises others. e.g. the brutalised view of everyone around as a thief..

Also, in my mind, there is a question of how to deal with corporate public-tentacles – eg supermarket stores – in a way that might be directed to the corporation’s occupation of everyday life, not at the people who via economic choicelessness have to spend time doing the corporate whims.

sport and society but uncontrolled?

Since Cesar the original stating stuff to the effect that developing gladiatorial events in the Colosseum is rather cool for keeping most people happily concentrated on stuff that doesn’t really matter, I think a certain usage of sport* by politicians and power people has a certain documented evidence.
(* Gladiatorial games are indeed neither sport nor do not really matter as they required death and injuries to be sustained. However, am using them as equivalents based on the times – eg, mass support for a sport – rather than drawing a moral equivalence. Mind, death in sporty activities was much more common in the, err, “good old” days..)

With the money involved in contemporary mass-sport. When people are prepared to spend $2billion on a basketball team (LA Clippers), or even pay a few million pounds for a player to kick a ball every so often in some rainy field that no one has heard of, I wonder whether we can not do slightly socially helpfully with the money*.

(* This does not mean am altering the idea of “numerical exchange – eg money – is an exchange media for poor people”. Am simply asking whether it might not be interesting, as long as money/numerical-exchange-media is used, why not use it playfully in sports that, afterall, supposed to be a play?)

Lets say that team X from err Brighton can pay players, buy new ones for X million pounds. (The Brighton Err Team of all sport) This money comes from – or based upon – the supporters’ outlay, TV revenues, advertising, etc.
Can we not say that instead of buying a player* and paying Z amount of pounds to be pocketed by certain individuals, the outlay involved could be used for social, cultural and charitable ranges that depend of the Err Brighton team’s supporters concerns?

(* Perhaps the amounts used for paying players to do their stuff could be similarly altered so that the vast majority of it goes to supporters’ concerns, and the actual player gets an average of how much supporters earn themselves?)

Perhaps this way, the sport might stop hiding its general political linkage of lead keeping and controlling a population? Also, it might be interesting with a process of sport success and gaining fan-base linked to attempts to benefit* the actual lives of people involved?

(* benefit might seem like a positive idea to begin with, and turn a bit sour later.. Perhaps “Alter” or “Change” should be used. It might be that a certain supporters groups would rather fancy donating the money to some racist bastards, or some capitalistic maniac, etc.. – However, the issue for me is that of having an open link between politics and sports and and evolutionary process as to how resources from that link can be employed by the people involved. This does not presume people do not make mistakes. The opposite. Perhaps it does presume that people can learn from mistakes..)

coco co coocoo corelation ismic?

Checked corelation on the dictionary.

Seems interesting the way that corelations might come about.

The word art has to Be,in english, when a is followed by an r that’s followed by t.
Once the letters come is that specific order – sequence – they are correlated for the purpose of producing the sound of the word “art”.
However,
If we used the same set of letters and altered the order – perhaps not the corelational facts between the letters, to TAR or RAT – we get other sounds that happened to have un-related meanings.
Art, Rat and Tar are not related nor inherently or historically corelated. We can consider a time when the sound Rat meant a rat but the sound ART had no attached meaning.
However,
now that these were pointed out – correctly or not – at least for the purpose of this note’s sense of being, there is – perhaps very limited – a correlation between rat, tar and art?

Is this a sort of corelationism?

pain and death fear?

According to Hilary Puntam’s computationalist manifesto a conscious organism is a probabilistic automata that can sense/feel pain. The pain bit is not the same as fear, but reminds me Hegel’s idea of fear of death – an end – as a kind of probable crisis that requires an awareness for probable extension of living time.

Am I making a correlation or a wave association? (eg, in the “family”.)

Anyhow, from that line of thinking, perhaps the following notes could be made:

* Capitalism, via computational approach that seeks to automate operations, relations, and socialisation – hence seeking political stability – finds it hard to alter unless there is a crisis. Unless violence touches it.
Hence, it might be argued that socially the people on the range-wave of anti to less-inclined capitalists are the ones that sense the wave between various pains and fears of social, cultural termination. (end of x culture)
They might be the “aware” elements in society, yet unlike the capitalists – un-aware of stuff Outside the social range. eg, How capitalism operates – hence help keep capitalism alive while being unable to rid us from it. Provide precisely what capitalism requires to be not just an automata, but an adaptable organism.
eg – the conscious bit was fighting capitalism for including all races, genders, sexes, religions, etc. – capitalism is slowly altering itself to adapt and by doing so, entrenches itself further.

* The turing machine sequences are finite at least in terms of time, material. That is perhaps the automation of destiny.
Once a person is on a certain loop of tradition, habit, sequence, etc. – then the probabilities are reduced to with a pre given X.
However, when a person challenges the traditions, habits, etc. – the sense is of free will, but in fact its an n addition of possible links, breakages, and elements which may allow new – yet-to-be-tried automation by the given organism/body.

an illustration of ignorance or

just cheesy marketing?

Check this from http://blocktech.com/:

Alexandria – History, unedited.
Alexandria preserves the integrity of the historical record. It taps into collective, on-the-ground reporting by scraping Twitter as events unfold and prevents after the fact censorship by archiving the information on a blockchain. Alexandria’s visual word cloud and timeline slider illuminate surprising connections. It’s history written by everyone, not just the victors.

I think it seems “nice” and “positive” etc. until the actuality of what they say is being considered.

Assuming they are indeed listening in – scrapping data – off from twitter and perhaps other social sites, are they really archiving history unedited, written buy “everyone” not just the “victors”?

Or

Is it that the “victors” are the twitter – and other such social network/s – applying their own screens onto messages, and the writer of an archived history for “Alexandria” will be the people that can afford to play the game of googling, facebooking, twitting, etc..?
(Afford as in having the time, the money for gadgets, and the will to subjugate one’s own free time & data to a corporate power.)