Wired Magazine explained recently that the "online" world of the web is fading in importance as apps that just work and machine to machine conversations take over the Internet. A major driving force behind this phenomenon is that those of us who grew up with the World Wide Web are reaching the point where we have a few bucks to spend, and would rather pay for a service then spend our time fiddling with computers in order to get access to the ideas, music, news, people, etc. that we love. They take a look at the history of industrial development and the like as a model to understanding the further implications of this phenomenon, and point out that regulated oligopolies appear to be the natural end point for capitalism.
There are some broad implications that occur to me, which I'd like to think through.
My first thoughts are for those of us who are convinced of the principles behind Free Software, and who would see that those principles guide the future. It's been stated repeatedly that our interest is not that people are prevented from making a profit, only that we want to ensure that said profits do not come at the cost of people's liberties. To win the pragmatic side of the debate is likely more important that to win the ideological debate. I suspect that in this case it is actually good news that most people don't care how things are done "behind the scenes" so long as everything basically works. Why? Because machine to machine communication is simplest with open, standardized protocols (I'm thinking TCP/IP and the like). The trick is not, as was thought, to take over the desktop and win the hearts of computer users. The trick is to make sure that the open platforms are the best way to handle the back-bone first.
Okay - Stop writing this for a certain audience. This is a think through..
Damnit. I got to the end without any of the steps. So what is the end? The end is that we use REST to deliver real life services.
Thats the trick. Okay - so what does that mean? That means that your "pizza" application is both a free app and an open api. Nobody fucking cares about the advertisements, coupons, etc. They want to push a button and trade their money for Pizza. Or, more importantly for a guy like me, photos, or what the fuck ever.
Like rats in a cage - push the button, get a food. Button -> food, button -> food, and pretty soon you've got a rat that wouldn't leave his fucking cage if you paid him.
And thus was conquered a world.
Son of a bitch!
Writing an e-mail was inordinately difficult because my brain is trying to comprehend that the Internet + non-dualism + the development of multicellular life implies that the Borg are a probable future; but when we arrive as such it may be a form of enlightenment. If current individuals were particularly intelligent in the next couple of years, they could probably existing technologies to establish themselves as effective precursors. Conclusion: Facebook + wireless sunglasses could turn "friends" into multi-organism beings. But the sci-fi writers knew that no later than 1989, so why does this feel like news to me?
Queries:
Does your brain do this kind of thing? Does everyone's? How much of conversation is spent simply attempting to establish a premise from which you can actually say something useful? How often do you find it hard to tell someone what your schedule is this weekend because you are preoccupied by the idea that sending someone an e-mail in order to make plans is functionally similar to one neuron passing on a message to another, only less efficient?
I've mentioned a wish for effective dense communication in the past. So are we all walking around, intensely frustrated by an inability to communicate the bigger picture of our circumstances to each other, or is all this crap in my head a uniquely problematic: akin to schizophrenia or ADD?
As children, my siblings and I were given a rule for conversation: anything we wished to tell our mother had to be finished within four sentences. If we went over the limit she would make us stop, think it through, and then get to the point. It taught us to consider the meaning of our words, separate important ideas from the useless ones.
So after a decade of trying, failing, reading, learning, adjusting, asking, answering, thinking, exploring, playing, wishing, wondering, re-evaluating, contemplating and so forth, I think I've come up with a motto that encompasses everything I need to know moving forward.
"Kiss the dragon on the nose."
Sounds kind of silly, but it covers love, power, freedom, creativity, adventure, and playfulness. It does so in a way that those words can be remixed into other forms - compassion, courage, humor, joy, etc depending on circumstance. Easy to remember, requires a lot of internal fortitude but also a particularly intense sense of humor and imagination. Plus I stole the core idea from someone who inspires me.
I like it, it's mine. Now I'll have to see how well it applies.
I've been thinking about principles again. I once mentioned that having some solid principles to rely on makes for a useful fall-back when things get rough. One can address certain problems by asking, for example, "what is the most powerful thing I could do here? The simplest? The most adventurous?" I find that far more useful than the typical, emotionally reactive things I've seen.
I've been bored a lot lately. Too much cognitive surplus, and video games don't cut it.
It occurs to me that one might not simply fall back on principle when dealing with problems. What's the most powerful thing a human being can do at all, regardless of circumstance? What's the most adventurous thing I'm actually capable of? The simplest?
Some of these ideas are already reflected in my habits, but at a relatively low level of understanding. I make sure I'm doing some kind of exercise regularly, which is a minor exploration of power. Treat family and friends with the intent of loving them. Stick to Free software to the extent that work allows. I have a pretty simple life punctuated with minor adventures, when the mood strikes. It would be interesting to see how far these can be taken though, get past maintenance and into.. I don't know, world domination or something. It bears a bit of investigation and then experiments and application.
One thing that occasionally blows my mind is a fairly simple train of what I hope is logical thinking. It goes like this:
I am a small piece of the Universe.
I am aware of myself, and aware of the Universe.
Therefore, the Universe is aware of me, and of its self.
I don't expect to get back on the Christianity train any time soon, but the experience of having this epiphany "feels" more like it should be worded:
"I think, therefore ... (God!?)"
There are other odd tracks that tend to flow. Such as whether the oceans or Earth should be counted as "alive" even though the rocks and salt don't reproduce themselves. If you take a fish out of the ocean, it tends to die. So is the fish not a part of the ocean? What about the fact that if you took a given scoop of ocean water up and looked at in under a microscope, it would probably have a ton of single celled organisms in it?
Oh right... they call that an "ecosystem."
The whole thing is a mental parlor trick. I can't do anything with these thoughts.
"Ooh, it's amazing! But wait ... so what?"
I've been stationary all day, feeling strangely weak and confused by how easily the rain makes me want to do nothing. Wet. Cold. Normally I am unfazed, but today, no thank you.
Listening to a long, somewhat rambling pod-cast on the subject of personal development. The speaker says from the beginning that it is unplanned. He starts the hour thinking about the nature of death and impermanence, and concludes by suggesting we are all essentially spiritual beings who have come to strengthen ourselves in our alignment with truth, love, and power.
One of those rare moments when it seems like I've heard something worthwhile.
But damn. That looks like a really long road.
I stumbled across an article about Buckminster Fuller none too long ago. Apparently he claimed that purpose is innate, but follows a rule of "precession." The explanation being that one's purpose is achieved as a side-effect of one's goals.
Bees, for example, have individual goals along the lines of "go find pollen to make honey." As a side effect of their doing so, they pollinate plants, granting the rest of us the ability to eat.
Unfortunately, this means that there is no achieving anything in any lasting sense. Best to find a way to live while loving what you do, because there is no finish line. (Unless, as George Carlin jokes, we actually are here to produce plastic*.)
Perhaps, for those of us constantly hungry for meaning, the best we can hope for is positive feedback about the effects our lives have.
* Of course, if Carlin's approach is right, we're probably here to develop some kind of heavily armed super-consciousness.
Lilly is an artist, among three hosts on a panel discussion on art, architecture, and the public sphere held Saturday.
She went to a village in Rwanda as an artist. The people there showed her mass graves, bones stacked haphazardly on open shelves. She observed that healing would not happen there, with the bones of their loved ones simply haunting them on a daily basis. She showed the living a few tile mosaic techniques and found herself aiding the design and construction of a proper burial site. The new one is white and purple. Purple is the color of national mourning. It is beautiful, and Lilly claims this is the most important point: Beauty is healing for the soul.
Lilly is not a student of community organizing, activism, or politics. She did not lead the effort either. She was a catalyst. "Without me, the work would not have happened, but with me, it was not mine."
She is older, English is not her native tongue. She comes across as extremely intuitive, her actions and words seem to come straight from her creative right-brain.
She spoke of innate knowledge. Where others at the meeting were applying theories and studies, she simply followed her instincts.
I do not think she struggles with meaning. It might be unwise to adopt another's path, or cause, or launch into some misguided attempt to save the world, but there is something here. I think it is about right brains, and moving from right to left brain and back. Getting closer to animal instincts without losing one's reason.
Does the idea of innate knowledge ring any bells?
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought." ~Matsuo Basho
Ayn Rand (of all people), points out that in a strange place, one must ask: "Where am I? How can I discover it? What should I do?"