link and #art?

Here’s a linking machine made from a perceived section of artistic linked history. You get to choose 2 images and the machine will link them. The machine has an algorithm that will make links, it requires links even when “there are none”. Does it imagine in links? does it not link just by making a visual connection?

If that visual connection, say the kind that connects via an algorithm that checks for similar shapes, is an historical event, does it not – in itself – become the link that wasn’t there?

Yo! Sure it is an historical link, by virtue of making it, however, will it stay for long?

Does it matter how long a link might linger?

The sensation of linking, of connection, is it not based on power?

Say i connected a to n in a flimsy way, simply because i fancy linking, since my mind is the link, should this link be shut down after my death?

Well.. Question is whether you fancy involving other people, no?

People. People! People? why only people? Maybe the link my mind makes will be fab for some species yet to be?

Maybe the link in your mind is only for yourself?

If for yourself, why not keep it, for yourself?

Why inflict a link on others? What about this linking machine?

What about it?

Does it not inflict its own connections upon others?

You don’t have to use it..

But its “there”.. Its in the shared-sphere already.. We can link to eachother having experienced making connections with that linking algorithm, right? So why a human made link might not be interesting, or should be kept to self?

Can you make your links interesting?


Via power?

Via intelligence?

Artificial, or otherwise?

imagining and imagining and yet a bit more?

Do you know people that go: i presume that X (something) is going to happen – therefore am going to do Y (something as a reaction, or linked to the thing they presumed is going to happen)?

Like my father?

Like the person that presumed they’ll have a job tomorrow and borrowed heavily based on that assumption?

Hold on, isn’t there another kind of imagining that relies on a sense of reality?

Which one?

Like the imagining that since I can use a plane, and have enough time and funds, I can fly to new zealand?

Yes, however listen to the time tense difference: since I have vs since i presume. Does it not ring in different tones?

Different rhythms?

What’s wrong with presumption?

Is it a question of presumption and wrong, or a mistaken perception of presumption?

Perhaps a mistaken imagination of presumption?

Like imagining the presumed is not assumed but has already been consumed?

Less cheesy, but maybe a bit like calling the presumed by its name rather than saying it is something else?

The presumed imagined as if it has already occurred?

But don’t we presume the next breath will contain oxygen?

Presume or take a chance? 😉

Is it not also a question of power?


Say I presume that I will have money to get that ticket to new zealand, and in the event, I don’t. However, if I have enough power, say to borrow money, all is cool, no?

Are you talking about a presumption or a calculated risk?

Are we saying that imagination is relying on un-imagined realities?

I think that maybe some imagination is. Is it not that what is claimed here is an independence for the very reality of imagination – no matter what it is linked with?

Did you say something coherent I managed to miss?

Nope 😉

Imagination has its own reality, if we lose that thread, we lose both reality and imagination?

If X is anything that is perceived as high up, and can actually be imagined bang in the middle of your body?

Like the sky is actually in the middle of your body?

How does it feel?

It feels?

Actually? Are we not imagining it?

Exactly, we actually imaging, no need for other reality, right?

Do we not have the reality of sky?

Nope, cause sky is just an instantiation of X. We can simply imagine X and then let that X be, no?

a gene, epigene kind of art gallery orientation?

love, kant and if?

ever met someone, fell inlove and sensed like you’ve always loved them?

knowing you never knew them throughout your life?

like one could tell themselves that indeed they didn’t know the loved one yesterday – and even recall that day which they weren’t inlove – yet they can sense as-if they knew and were inlove with a particular entity throughout their life?

maybe like something that has become ubiquitous in one’s life? Do you recall the times before internet? Do you know you were alive then? does it not seem like the internet was always there – even when it wasn’t?

Was that a love declaration for the internet?

Is love some kind of an a priori?

What if love is an example of a-priri’s dependency upon evolution?

Why love, why not technology as well?

Yes.. Perhaps even god?


If god is – even as a pure concept – something that is a-priori in the sense that it doesn’t need to be experienced empirically to be known or at the very least, believed in, maybe it is indeed something which is yet to evolve?

Or be evolved?

Who evolves god?

A religious person?

Does this thing imply that if we check time..?

Time? Temporality? Rhythms?

Stuff to that effect, lets not get particular now, its a wide question – are we saying that if we look at time, as in evolution being stuff in time, that a-priri can evolve?

Was there a time when 7+5 were not 12?

Can you imagine a time before there were 7, 5 and 12?

Can you imagine a time when there was no +?

Do we not know there were times like that?

But hold on, what of necessity and contingency?

What of it?

Is it possible to have a world without a priori, without contingency, with no necessity and stuff like that?

A world in which stuff might have evolved to be contingent?

Evolved to be necessary or a priori?

A sense of contingency?

A sensation from contingency?

Is the contingent immanent and therefore both essential and necessary when imagined in time?

If the contingent imagined in time, or the sense of contingency?

If there is a sense from being up for grabs, maybe just being Up, as to grab implies power and having to use power is in itself, not always essential nor necessary?

If immanent is identity in time?

An identity done via an evolving contingency?

WTF is contingent in time??