how the car i rented today illustrates why the world is no longer cool, liquid modernity, ergonomic shunyata (being devoid of an instrinsic nature)
[…]
i bought my car for 2,000 in a field. many people equipment or tools that were more expensive than my car.
i love my car. being an artist, i am naturally not in many vehicles that cost more than this.
until today, when i rented a minivan. a new minivan.
the minivan is fully encased in digital-ness: it is designed to be as modern as possible.
this is a great illustration of how modern design and technology is dehumanizing. we often use this word, but here we can see what it really means clearly: it strips out the human element.
that basically means: it sucks and is not cool. lets quickly go over our case study here:
1. you don’t put the keys into the car.
what is the most immediate, cool, tactile part of getting in a car?
the keys. starting the engine. well, don’t worry, that’s gone now.
has anyone on earth ever complained about gripping the keys, inserting them, and revving the engine? no, because it’s awesome and feels cool.
this is now replaced by the “keys” (functionally, a remote), simple existing. they just need to be there, and the car can start.
now instead of stabbing a piece of cool steel and cranking a machine i barely understand into violent animation, i get to look around for a metal box, to ensure i am proximate to it - or worse, i just know its there, and do nothing.
robbed. emasculated. dehumanized.
2. what else is cool about being in a car?
the radio. the sensation of pressing the buttons and turning the knobs.
gone. all digital
we could theoretically accept this. but look how it spills out, from the tactile experience, into your innermost being - your image of yourself:
you want to flip through the stations. thats cool. you enjoy this.
in a normal car, you can rest your finger on the button, and just push it, while driving.
but now theres no button. its a screen. you have nothing to rest on. the birds of the air have nests: you have nothing
now you have to just have your finger there: your flaccid outstretched finger, trying to keep its place over the virtual image of a button, constantly checking to ensure you have not drifted away from it
but of course you have. look at yourself. this is a shameful position
“oh jeez ah i accidentally pushed it uh let me just” - where’s the back button? you cant feel it. no one knows. its not there. look back off the road to find it. maybe you’ll crash and save yourself from this sorry state, off to a post mortal realm where they still have
buttons
every feature in the car is like this.
3. all gauges are digital
wow i really hated seeing actual meters turn to tell me how fast i was going and how much fuel i have. i hated being directly visually enmeshed with the analog nature of the machine im trusting my life to
just kidding that rules.
at least now its way cooler to receive the information “you are going 85 mph” from an interface that looks like it could also tell me “you have seven unread emails”
oh wait that actually sucks
that actually is not cool in any way, at all
good thing this is at least cheaper
actually its way more expensive
is it safer
lol no
is it more environmentally friendly? probably not. what are touchscreens made of? they feel like plastic. well at least people like touching and looking at plastic.
everyone loves that
every aspect of life is rapidly undergoing the exact process outlined here
humans are tool creatures. our tools are part of us. we live through the tools
i am the liquid modernity minivan. i have no “minivan nature”. i am a car without the things that make a car a car
for now
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
the reason the alien news isnt “sticking” or taking off for most people is that there is no meta-narrative provided. the people in charge arent telling them what to think about it.
they dont have their own meta narrative about this topic, so its just, bizarrely, useless info.
i was in new york city when brexit happened. whatever you thought about that, there was a period of a day or two where people didnt know what to think, because no one told them.
was this good or bad? they had no idea.
then, the framing dropped, and it was “bad”. its that simple
the meta-narrative (this is a part of XYZ and relates to ABC and is bad for these reasons, these ‘types’ of people are involved) took about 36 hours to kick in.
the noteworthy part of all alien disclosure news for many years is that no meta-narrative is ever provided, ever.
long ago when i was into lucid dreaming, i found a guy who made a device that you wear over your face. the idea was: it detected, via your eyes, when you were in REM sleep. it then makes a soft noise. you recognize this noise (while dreaming), and then realize youre dreaming.
…
pretty smart. the problem was, he got complaints that the devices were faulty. people would wake up and be unable to turn the noise off. theyd wake up, take the thing off, and then be sitting in bed messing with it, unable to get it to stop making the noise.
so they return them.
but when he checked the devices, they weren’t broken. they were fine. so he’d send them back. then theyd return them again.
turns out they were working - too well. people were unable to turn the sound off because they were in a dream.
101 concepts: our culture's inverted perception of aggression
here's something useful: if you look for this, you will suddenly start seeing it everywhere. some of you are already familiar with this model
"aggression" is confrontational, "hostile", a readiness to "attack".
...
aggression has a negative connotation at this time. maybe it's not really negative, that's debatable, but at this time that is the cultural perception.
disagreeing with someone is not inherently negative. it's, at worst, value neutral. you can't really control if you disagree.
if you voice disagreement in a matter of fact way, that is not being aggressive. its actually the opposite. if you say, "things are happening this way, thats unacceptable to me", or "you see things this way, i don't see them that way and think that's bad", that isn't aggressive
obviously i dont really lock in to ‘conventional timeline’ stuff but its worth noting that you’ll never see a scientist present the plausible simple logical reason mysterious artifacts like this existed:
to impress women.
if you could make and wield one of these, you were cool.
scientists usually arent artists or artisans so theyre unfamiliar (experientially) with making an object to get a womans attention, even though its one of the most universal human experiences and fits perfectly within their worldview (lets say, darwinian evolution).
i noticed this in my own studies and moves through academia. on the science or even academic art side i basically never encountered this explanation (although im sure it exists).
this is probably why a lot of ancient small sculptures of women exist imo btw.
recently a guy came by the studio and said he had been hitting the books on "satanology": what different groups thought about satan
lets briefly look at satan in mormonism, and its relationship to american theology and our early history
[brief usual disclaimer that i have no qualifying background about anything outside of art and am just a random guy who finds this stuff interesting
if this gets RTed beyond my normal crew: im not a member of the LDS church, you could call me an american religion enthusiast.]
[if ur a nerd or are part of that world, for that reason im intentionally using the term mormon rather than LDS but thats beyond the scope of this thread]
if you picked up a full copy of the mormon scriptures, in it would be the bible (KJV), which you are probably familiar with