bathroomisation of life?

If everything is linked to bathroom. Kitchen is preparation for bathroom. Street as a shared toilet and bathing in dirt. Movements, sweating, temperatures are constant body excrements maketrs. The body as an organic toilet, etc.
If everything is a loaf of bread linked. If everything is always inside a container. If everything is linked to a sound of MOO. eg – No is 1.5 steps removed from MOO. Too is 7 times removed from MOO, and so on. If everything is some kind of a radiator:
Colours radiate the vibrations of pigments. Pills radiate the purposes they suppose to help/heal/cure. Sugar radiate sweetness. Airplanes radiate quick and expensive long distance travel/movement. Links radiate connections and combinations of elements. etc..

Here we get into streeeeeeeeeeeeeetching practices, no?
How far can I take Bathroom/radiator/moo/etc. – to blanket cover other stuff. Is this not some sort of an ideology? Using a preconceived notion of X to account for stuff it might not be – all in the altar of linking? All for the god of linking? All for the road of free and fearless imagination. All for the view that if a bread loaf is a keyboard, then keyboard is as essential for this typing – even metaphorically – as the bread-loaf for human lives.

All in the name of everything is a bit authoritarian no?

However there is a very interesting – some might say powerful – perhaps i should say pervasive argument for the stretching of concepts, ideas, things, metaphors, etc – they seem to correspond with some ways we tend to imagine and sometimes think but more often perceive – X as being a bit Like Y. Then the link between the known X and the lesser known Y might make sense and help accommodating Y. Or that X is stuff we fancy learning and taking to its limits. Or that X is done as Y for the sake of imagining itself.

This seems a bit dishonest to me. Or maybe not dishonest but poor in thoughts and consideration? Perhaps a combo of both? Probably some other elements? Anyway, the reason for that critique is that when I stretch stuff – unless it is to break the stretched stuff – eg when and how everything can not actually be a circle – then am using elements that allow stuff to Be stretched. eg when everything is on a razor-blade tilting endlessly from side to side while keeping on an edge that is death itself – am using elements that ALLOW X to be stretched. Am applying Power to the element s that allo w Xtobe Stretch ed and fix the m. I s ay the X can b e y b c a u s e i i m a g i n i t t o b e s o – and thatimaginationisveryimportant.anditakechargeover thatimagination. andthat ispowerno? taking the energy of X – be it stretching of stuff – and Using it. Applying the energy. We have evenrgy of electricity and we apply, use power that directs that energy to turn on a device. no? no? no?

Perhaps if we want to link freely between elements, rather thsn stretching and producing a culture of mini ideologies – seeing x from the view of y – it is possible to get into the link-able? The stuff shared that al;lows linking while keeping x being a Being of x rather than Y?

A certain sequence – 123 is a hundred and twenty three. The numbers though,can be used in 1,2,3 – while keeping their own identity in both cases. In that sense these can be done because numbers, unline coffee – are links in themselves. Letters are links too no?
Perhaps placing stuff on its Linking links frequency allows linking while not stretching?

or is thi a stretch of links and linking?

eternal internet brotherhood’s art and artists early get togethers

root free is not root less but root unchanged in a way that

perhaps roots – the tv series re slavery – re-changed, to a history, but didn’t set free?

OK.. this was a bit of a long sequence with probable short life.

I could have said: “this was a bit of a long sequence with probable short life” as:
That was a bit of a Baseless line to begin with.
That was a ROOTless line to begin with – and remain within the root language, imagination, animal, material..

However, the imagination of “roots” and stuff built upon them, is precisely the subject.. Hence:
this was a bit of a long sequence with probable short life – because we can free our minds off root-oriented imagination.
The problem I find in root imagination is that it is hierarchical, and life isn’t. In that sense, the premise denies the description. Am trying to convey X in life – but can not, because IT ISN’t linked to roots, it isn’t living in roots, it lives in links, and crossings, and rhythms, and sequences, and networks, and spahens, and ands, and searches, and ifs, and probably more – but roots, one on to of another – it aint..

I need to tell this better.. Hopefully some other time.. When am not in between stuff.. 😉

daily links already?


Priscilla Tea!

Welcome To Quiet Lunch | #ForTheQulture

Maciej Ratajski

Cult of the Amateur?
Day 1

generative language, science etc

emergent and generative elements/properties

Transformational-Generative Grammar from Ruth Ann Llego–Unshackling_Evolution.pdf

sequences, rhythms
Language to Literacy Program

diy isp local networks


What is GroupLens?

Generative and emergent economy?

Chaos Theory and Economic Emergence from Economics

Toward a generative economy

Forget Mega-Corporations, Here’s The Mega-Network

Miscs.. and admin/organisation

mid eveningish links batch genetic noises nocode? bitcoins suckness Philosophy Matters24

sensations as are links they are?

if you keep with this process that you are reading now, lets call this reflecto-senso-read.. Now, via that declaration, we have reflecto-senso-reading?

spoken, written and shared-made lingos as senslinks..? 1 + 1 is a link to other sensations that can be sharedlinked as 1s..?
eg the whole of the earthbound incect population is 1, the gallaxy in which they live is another 1. now, 1 (insect population) + 1 (gallaxy)

they might not be = 2?

right – hence i didn’t begin with 1 + 1 = 2
1 + 1 is a foldable sequence – but how it folds makes it a readymade object.
if its left as 1 + 1, it is a link, no?

now lets consider 1 whole insect population + 1 galaxy?
from these 1 + 1 we could fold into a film of the insects galaxy? or continue to a + 1 human – 1 number? or = the rhythms between the shortest noises they do? or Once upon a language of an insect planet that realised they are inside a galaxy?


will, wills, way, willies, performance, performativities and perhaps

lights? walls? solutions? waves? grass? new-beginnings?

OK.. (Should stop that..)

I was taking some food up the stairs and doing some acrobatics to keep the plates, cups, and food in-tact. My brain said to itself “when there is a will – there is a way”..
Lets consider that?

Why is it Will and Way, rather than Will and LIGHT, or solution, or stairs, etc..? I think there is something to do with the Ws. They sound well together and culturally, a way, sounds more like a solution than a Wave or a Wall..
What kind of disturbs me is the possible performativity of “WillWay”.. Because they SOUND/Perform well together, it gives the sense that there MUST be a solution indeed – if I had a REAL will, or something to that effect..

In reality, they have nothing to do with the life they suppose to interact with. They are a performative trick – or are they? Maybe am a bit numb to them? They seem like an object that stops me from Practising actual overcoming of difficulties.. They kind of offer a performance of perception based on the way of the Will.. Maybe at times the will is precisely the hindrance? Maybe at time it has nothing to do with the sequence?

Perhaps there can be a more abstract notion that then can be practices rather than Performed? What exactly will BE the difference between the practice and performance? I think the process of individualisation, of making X your own.. No?


If it is so, how will a non performative sequence be like – without it being a reflection of something else, but a practice of its linking and emergent properties..?

midday ish kind of links?

Tim Ingold on Anthropology beyond Humanity

Ray Brassier – Nominalism, Naturalism and Materialism

The Speculative Turn: Continental Materialism and Realism (irreduction)


More on Accelerationism


Scientists Create an Organism with a New Genetic Code,%20Carolina.pdf


notes about imagination and linkes elements?>

i think that because of stuff i imagine to have been through, the language of imagination is that of links. suggestive links, crossing links, sequential links, etc. – however links they are.
This disturbs me because:
– i am probably wrong, there must be other elements – irreducible/primes – of the imagination lingo-material.
– i do not know now how to do that language in a way that its materials are indeed links rather than visions/reflection of links.

the other disturbance in my mind is that of known/knowledge/past.
I thought that it seems reasonable/authentic/honest to claim that I know stuff from past. hence search is from spacetime of knowing rather than towards utter unknown. this way, i felt that basing on the known rather than focusing on the un of knowns, can help imagination and search go wilder.
However, in reality, do I really know the past of my futures? Do I not keep reassessing, checking, criticising precisely because i know not..?

links dump of the day

perhaps a few days and some intersecting links..

Why Virtual Currency Is Here to Stay – Bitcoin or No Bitcoin

The real use of money is to buy freedom

Imagination Gone Wild: Combat and Emergent AI Possibilities from EQNext,%20Carolina.pdf

Scientists Create an Organism with a New Genetic Code

RapGenius Growth Hack Exposed


a web of ubu db?

we we talking ubuweb at furtherfield hosting of Giving What You Don’t Have.
the suggestion that ubuweb has no critique and the critique offered in place linked … sorry.. got to write something else....

OK.. Back here..

The critique talked about at the talk in furtherfield linked in my mind to – Hey! lets make some stuff that UBUweb should have but doesn’t and kind of linked to this discussion.. In one word(ish) {self}Reflection. If its an UBU web, Lets make a web of UBUs.. Indeed one that might imagine various ways of linking, sharing, and thinking of UBUs as well as ubuwebbing?

* it will be a db that isnt, but could?
* a web that is but could be un-webbed as well as forked and added features to..? (humm.. check the add features and the ideas re stuff like chance poetry in..
* should this be like a domain? (will begin this as a subdomain for the skint nature of my life..
* should the db-no-db be shit or shittable? (not in meaning but in imagination?)
* how to do various kind of UBUlinks? Are the UBUlinks shittable? Perhaps yes? How to shit a link? Are these links that leave their scent? eg. Link, and a scent of a link is
In that case, how will this be a shitty scent? A scent that is linked to a useage and rejection of stuff? Check this code here? ?? Hummm

a few thoughts re links in rhythms and networks of ducks

was just typing the beginning of a-web-of-ubu-db.
then it seemed for me that idk why people look for, in my view, fetishise, origins of processes, practices, projects and objects.
…which linked to/with/into links in networks.. links rather than event/cause/effect are the network make up. ..but you see how i wrote this?
rather than something (commonly used).
would i say the earth is a planet rather than a tree?
we could think of planets AS ANALOGOUS trees – but that they are trees..
So links..
can everything be linked? is everything linkable? well.. i think that is interesting in the case of ubuweb’s spectrum of action – how its done/being-made – and spectrum of content.
* Spectrum of action –
with an over lord managing the database – there is one person that from a network movement direction seems to be a hub of rejection/acception of links. I like/dislike this link or another – and i have the power to be on a narrow band of frequency because i like it!
* Spectrum of content –
in terms of reference, it can be said that by the centrality of Ubu, content can be linked to king ubu’s shit, and Jari’s link of Ubu’s shit to theatre – which SEEMED unlinkable/non-connectable at the time. Dada, which is/can/may be linked to Jari’s King Ubu, like the surrealists, used, for example, chance processes/strategies to produce stuff.
Chance based stuff carries with it a certain problem/difficulty in the sense that although made of linkables – eg words/colours – they do not link except deep within the artist own sense of profound ego. eg even the artists do not always feel/sense the links, the reason they Push these works is that they themselves “produced/made” it, its a shit made of the artist own arbitrary genius. However, because this arbitrary genial based products do not arbitrarily, but i’d argue – conservatively – rely on meanings, they fail to excite.
If you made a link between rhythms, links and ducks. A link that others might have not explored, and yet, seemed meaningful to someone, they might be excited to move this further. However, if the link seems like a duck.. Sort of a ducklink.. Then, like the dadaist/surrealist activities, the Meaning shifts from the product to the process of making, and the individual involvement in it.. Sort of a workshop.. ..And perhaps with the egos involved, a therapeutic workshop.

This shift is interesting, i think, of and in itself..

However, as the line above does, a link, i think the interesting/exciting/desire-able (desire as in seeking to fill as well as make a void), is to imagine spacetime spectrums of links abilities – knowing they’ll fail.. No?

Links are usually in space with no time.. Links now or not.. Not as in, linked in past, might link again..? No?

#art blackhole – links to/from the gallery? #bdf13 (zelda’s image cache links?) (links as a name for a gallery?) (some of artbylt’s web links?) (links as html web based to galleries?) (links to local art connected activities?) (links to web resources?) (another links as a gallery name?) ( a domain name?)

#art black hole – links to/from the gallery? #bdf13 by name or aspirations?) (perhaps connections between kind of objects production modes?) (a presentation of dogs?) (a No site, with a promise to use the gallery as a connector, a link, between the artist and the world?) (the gallery of your career connections?) (connection as an opening?) (the gallery as a list of links?) (links of friends and allies?) (links as information and gallery as link?)

trans and maths or numbers and meanings?

I keep wondering about stuff like:
the number 2, for example, it can apply for 2 apples, 2 as an abstract outcome of a calculation, as an element of another number, as an element of a calculation, etc… In such usages, the 2 doesn’t mean something other than what it is, but is being applied to be an element greater than just what it is..
20 has a 2 10 can be said to have a 2, but not in the way 7 is.. Which numbers don’t have anything to do with 2??
There are many numbers that have not much to do with 101, for example.. This is a number on a different sort of strands and sequences.. Different kind of rhythms and links and transes..

Are there sort of universal equivalents that are not entirely numbers?

categorically prejudiced ideologue

An interesting lecture a Human Behavioral Biology by Robert Sapolsky . –

About 15 mins in he is talking about categories and the prejudicial difficulties they produce.

The tack that is critical of categories seems very attractive to me. Perhaps am blinded by the attractiveness, however the notion of checking cause and effect to counter categorical thinking/imagining is a mistaken turn in my mind. It seems to me that cause and effect requires an ideology, a categorical prejudice, that predetermines the link between 2 or more elements to be cause and effect type.

Hyposub is a term that questions, or imagines the questioning of cause and effect kind of linking. As far as I seem to comprehend, Sapolsky suggests where a behaviour comes from. What happened around, what kind of neurons were firing, which elements were at play prior to an event.
I think that this approach, somehow ironically in the case of Sapolsky because he seems to push for anarchic rather than hierarchical understanding/learning, produces a prejudice of heirarchical processes. (one will not Be without X.) However, if we are in fact equals in a clustered soup network, then perhaps only link between signal switches*, that might go either/all ways, is a rather more accurate or free way to imagine?

Am using signal switches as basic possible elements, not with number attachment in mind. My fingers as signal switches on the keyboards’ keys that are signal switches -> the keys affect my fingers, determain where and how and in which effort they more, as much as my fingers affect the keys, press them keys. If we check the key being pressed as an effecy from a cause, we miss the network..?

significance and meanings with links

Am checking stuff re epigenetics – not sure why, but perhaps that is one of the epigenetic motivators..

So was listening to: – don’t be fooled by the subject, the delivery is as dry as it gets. She is trying though.. Hopefully she’ll get better.

Anyhow, I think that through that dry delivery, and by thinking along the lines of “wow, she is saying some significant stuff, I wonder if people will find meanings in it because it might be hard to link due to the dryness of the delivery” – that it seems perhaps Significance, Meanings and Links could also be interesting in the context of epigenetics.

An epigenetic event, say an activation of some chemical in a genetic code desert – apparently there are large parts of them deserts – has to link with some genetic code to “express” itself in a significant way. No link = as if it wasn’t there. As if it didn’t happen. As if the whole chemical activation didn’t happen. Hence, if it didn’t happen, it carries an even more weight in people’s mind, and turns into a question of Meaning. It means nothing if it didn’t happen. A bit like a game that has no consequences beyond it – on some sort of championship, for example – being currently linkless, a bit like this blog 😉 is equated with being insignificant and meaningless. However, just like the game, and this blog, indeed a chemical release event – it does and did happen.
Is it not for us, as entities that can actually at least pretend to think, or consider, or imagine, which is slightly different from active & reactive chemicals, to have more ways to link with stuff we might have not known to happen? Is it not, in a strange way, giving each one of us and as various group configurations, some meanings in it self..?