Category: Read

Consumers / Consumption of Written Things (Wanting / Wanted)

We love each other

I myself have come up with a hypothesis. I did this more or less by myself — and of course if you are familiar with my own ideas related to environment, habitat and so on, then you will take that remark about my own (singular) behavior with a grain of salt. 😉

Why do I want to underscore my own quasi “singularity” this way? Because I want to contrast my own behavior with the plurality of lovers — which is precisely my hypothesis: love is a plural behavior. All participants in a loving relationship realize that it is based on the mutual recognition that the “other(s)” in the relationship both derive satisfaction from appreciating the other(s), but also derive satisfaction from pleasing one another. This activates not only so-called “mirror neurons” but also feeds the narcissistic hunger for self-worth (and via a positive self-image also ultimately contributes towards a positive and a positively meaningful self-actualisation — i.e. in the context of others).

It’s just a hypothesis. If it were something more, then I might be more confident in following it up. But since I have no shortcomings about confidence in my own ideas, I will follow up as if it were something more.

Thus, therefore, … When someone says “I love you”, they take reciprocation as given. Whether or not this reciprocation actually exists needs to be determined. And perhaps such reciprocity needs to be developed over time. We do not normally move from a blank slate to full-on love at first sight. Such fantasies exist primarily because they seem extreme (i.e. fantastic) … almost like ideal states.

In real life love is only gradually proven.

PS: featured image adapted from “Banksy Girl and Heart Balloon” CC0 image (see credit via openverse.org below)

“Banksy Girl and Heart Balloon” by – Dom – is marked with CC0 1.0.

Three Questions

This is not some scene from Monty Python’s “Holy Grail”. [1]

It’s a storytelling exercise posed by Josepha. [2]

  1. What is the story that you want to be able to tell about yourself?
  2. What is the story that you want to be able to tell about your time with us in WordPress?
  3. What is the story that you want WordPress to tell?

Here are my answers (or at least some ideas about what I think might be appropriate answers at this time [of writing] ).

  1. I am relatively insignificant. I find much more meaning in my own use of language (so-called “natural” languages are — IMHO — the world’s largest open source technology to date).

For the following answers, I will revise the questions somewhat. “WordPress” is a meaningless string to me (AFAIK, it is a registered trademark, and therefore can only be defined by the owner of those legally protected rights (which are often referred to as “intellectual property” and the corresponding rights are commonly referred to as “IP law”). In her presentation, Josepha referred to the WordPress mission as “democratize publishing”. I wish to do more than that: I want to democratize all communications. I actually feel that it is something like a natural law that all communications must be democratized (as communications require the open source technology of natural language). It is not even possible (IMHO) to communicate without involving the participation of this open-source community. So in the above questions #2 and #3, I will replace “WordPress” with “natural language (open-source communications)”.

The new-and-improved (revised) questions (and answers) are:

R-Q2. What is the story that you want to be able to tell about your time with us in natural language (open-source communications)?

Many stories can be told, heard, listened to, shared, understood, inspired and so on. One very significant story seems to be the story (or stories?) of evolution. When we realize that evolution is always happening, then we begin to become aware that the distinction between “natural” and “artificial” (or “non-natural”) is perhaps moot — because nature itself is also always changing and adapting. There is in fact (?) no such natural law written in stone which is always true.

Likewise, developments do not go from plain good to plain bad or vice versa. Good and bad may not even exist at all. Martin Luther King drew attention to such phenomena when he spoke about the merits of being “maladjusted” versus the apparent value of being “well-adjusted”. Since the world is so complex, the number of variables which might serve as guideposts are so vast, they might as well be considered innumerable or even infinite.

Languages which serve some purposes well may do a poor job of serving other purposes. Which language we choose to use in one circumstance might be quite obviously sub-optimal in different circumstances. Since languages also evolve over time, we can rest assured that we will always have a broad spectrum of options available.

All we have to do is to keep the wheels well greased by incessantly exchanging ideas and practicing our communications in a wide variety of languages — we do not need to invent them on our own, in labs, in isolation from their natural environments.

R-Q3. What is the story that you want natural language (open-source communications) to tell?

I am no longer very sure how I want to answer a question like this.

If human languages prove to be maladjusted to their natural environments, then evolution will probably lead to these languages (and perhaps also humans themselves) to go extinct. Whether human extinction would be a good thing or a bad thing, I don’t know.

[1] cf. “Bridge of Death” scene
[2] Josepha’s own blog is @ https://josepha.blog. Here, I am responding to her “Three Questions” posted @ wordpress.tv [ https://wordpress.tv/2023/10/13/josepha-haden-chomphosy-on-the-future-of-wordpress ]

Just Fooling Around (?)

Keywords: Social Business , advertising , business , exploitation , marketing , mental health , narcissism , profit , profits , sucker , suckers , there’s a sucker born every minute , victim , victim mentality , victims

I have some hesitation about today’s topic. It’s complicated. And I feel a little bit outside of my “element” or “comfort zone” (ow whatever), which I feel is more logical, mathematical, rational, stuff like that.

This is about something completely different — most of all it’s about squishy wishy-washy stuff like feelings.

But before I start writing a post about my post, let me just dive into it. Perhaps a good starting point is this age-old saying:

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Many people say stuff like this all the time

I have even myself coined a term for this feeling. It goes beyond untrustworthy. I call something distrustworthy which is actually worthy of distrust (Google being a prime example that immediately springs to mind 😉 ).

Now let me get back to the complicated part for a moment.

Fun & games, happiness and all that jazz are important parts of life. We all want to be able to kid and play around a bit.

This is where the feelings come in. I think a big part of the Golden Rule is enjoying spending time here together. if someone is clearly not enjoying themselves, then you’re not doing it in a way that conforms to a “best of all possible worlds” scenario.

Now let me try to nail this thing down so we can consider what it all means.

A while back, I wrote a post about a saying usually attributed to P.T. Barnum (see “There’s a Sucker Born Every Minute” [ https://socio.business.blog/2023/05/15/theres-a-sucker-born-every-minute ]). If your idea of “just fooling around” is a matter of taking advantage of someone, then that someone could reasonably be expected to feel taken advantage of” (which is, as far as I know, always — or at least almost always — not a nice feeling to experience).

I think this is then a situation which is in violation of the Golden Rule.

What makes this difficult is that it’s about feelings. A little kid may very well feel perfectly on top of the world and the kid’s parents may be more than happy to pay manyfold the value of whatever it is the kid gets out of it, but if the kid or the parents feels they’re being duped or suckered or played (or whatever). then what might have been the basis for a trustworthy relationship suddenly transforms into something completely different — namely: the basis for a distrustworthy relationship.

Practice Self-Care

Keywords: Read , communications technology , Golden Rule , ICT , information , information and communications technology , information retrieval , information technology , knowledge , language , literacy , marketplace , natural language , search , technology

In this installment of the ongoing series about the Golden Rule, I want to talk about self-care. But before I get to that topic per se, let me note how nothing we ever do is ever done alone, in isolation, or independently of other people. Everything is always done in the context of our environment, and as everyone and everything on Earth shares this same planet as our context, we are all in this (and in everything) together.

In other words: “self” is an awkward concept (insofar as no-one could even exist outside of this shared context, habitat, or whatever you might want to call it — see also the homepage [ https://wants.blog ] for more related thoughts on this topic).

Nonetheless, if we do consider ourselves as individuals, separated and apart from one another, then we ought to (I feel, according to a “Golden Rule” type of sympathy for one another) practice self-care, simply in order not to become a burden upon one-another (and yet also in a self-serving way, for our own well-being, in what Adam Smith might have referred to as an “enlightened self-interest” kind of motivation).

Let me underscore one more time: In my opinion, this is definitely also a social behavior. Although it can be interpreted as a “pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps” behavior, I prefer to view it more realistically as a social act. Seen in this light, practicing self-care can easily be interpreted as an implicit request for help.

And this is precisely where the Golden Rule becomes fundamental. Let me split it up into (some of) its several parts:

  • practice self-care, in order not to become a burden on others
  • request help from others (who are capable of helping without being unduly burdened)
  • openly acknowledge your own gratitude for any help provided
  • show your own willingness to help others

Such sentiments are so fundamental to most friendships and similar relationships involving mutual support that it almost seems superfluous to point them out or to draw attention to them — as if there were something remarkable about regular and natural kindness that might need to be explained.

Today, however, I feel that the social cohesion we experience is becoming increasingly atomized and the social and supportive bonds we might experience on a daily basis may become ever more distant. Close relationships used to be a matter of close proximity. Increasingly, “close” is a matter of choice — we can choose to be close (or not) … with anyone. anywhere. anytime.

You may recall that I wrote about the film “Vicky, Christina, Barcelona” (2008) last week (see “Sparring for Literacy“). Today I am taking a more “personal” approach to pretty much the same topic (“communications”).

I feel we are all motivated (by the circumstances of distance) and to some extent need to make implicit wants more explicit. We increasingly need to actually say it out loud.

Sparring for Literacy

It’s time for another installment in our “Golden Rule” series. Today I want to talk about sparring for literacy. You might also think of this as iteratively bouncing ideas off of each other, a sort of turn-taking approach to testing out hypotheses — which is not taking place in modern educational institutions and / or research settings:

These old-fashioned educational institutions mostly (nearly universally) still consider mere publication to be the end game rather as simply a starting point to get the ball rolling in endless and ongoing games of information and communication. These more and more ancient institutions are failing societies by allowing infantile (and incoherent or even completely meaningless) marketplaces to function as arbiters of success and / or failure.

https://socio.business.blog/2023/12/02/about-technological-limitations-of-the-publishing-model-as-an-information-and-communications-technology

As in Woody Allen’s “Vicky Christina Barcelona” (2008), so we too need to test out what we want, don’t want, which direction we turn toward or away from, and so on. The publishing model is inadequate to the task of figuring out answers to such questions on an ongoing basis. We need ongoing information and communication feedback loops, rather than a one-way publishing industry.

Therefore, the Golden Rule of sparring with one another applies — we ought to spar with one another the way we expect our partners to spar with us. Thereby we train each other as we also train ourselves to communicate and inform each other, with one another, for one another and also in order to continually further develop and improve our information and communications technologies.

How many writers & bloggers apply the Golden Rule to writing & blogging?

Keywords: Social Business , Christ , Christian , Christianity , communication , communications , community , Golden Rule , Jesus , language , listen , listening , sharing , write , writing

You might want to grab a cuppa for this one, because Imma take you on a bender with a long arc and it will probably be night time before we return home!

I distinctly remember becoming aware of how this is actually a violation of Jesus’ “Golden Rule” — in other words: we ought to listen to others, much in the same way that we want others to listen to us.

https://socio.business.blog/2023/11/15/listening

Yes: I just quoted myself — which is (IMHO) perfectly OK because I manage so many blogs that now and then I simply have to do it! 😛

Well, so I see that other blog post as the introduction to my topic here today, so if you haven’t seen it, then please hop on over and check it out (it opens a new page, so it’s absolutely no problem at all to get back here 😉 ). And it’s not terribly long, either.

My hunch (also known as a hypothesis) is that few bloggers read other blogs and probably fewer interact in a significant way. Mind you: I said bloggers — let alone the general population (who hardly seem aware that the internet exists beyond the realm of Google & Amazon & Netflix (wait a second — is that the INTERNET, too?). Marketers will trample all over anything that sounds even remotely social, but marketing is different than what regular folks do — isn’t it?

Still — none of these folks, whether regular or normal or abnormal or whatever, do much more than dip their toes in. Balls deep? Are you kidding me?

Before I make a short story long, let me cut to the chase. During the 4 weeks of the advent season leading up to Christmas, I plan to entertain different aspects of this question (“How many writers and bloggers apply the Golden Rule to writing and blogging?”) … and maybe I will even manage to arrive at some sort of conclusion before the year ends (hopefully we will not all be lost forever, right?).

Sounds good? SMASH that subscribe button! 😀

Wants.Blog is now a (founding) member of the PHLAT.net online catalog network

As some of you might have noticed, I have been “taking a break” for a few days. I guess I needed some “time off”.

I didn’t simply just sit on the porch, put my feet up, sip on a long drink, whatever.

Instead, I decided to switch it up a bit and got a little more involved with the back end tech of the internet. Unlike in real life, dealing with bits and pieces of computer technology can seem quite challenging without any prospect of rewards in sight … until it works!

So I indeed did manage to work it out and after I jiggled the wires and flipped the switches and wiggled the knobs and shook the handles and whatnot, Wants.Blog has now become a founding member of PHLAT.net!

PHLAT.net is (IMHO) a new and improved approach to the WWW … and one Wants.Blog readers should (I feel) definitely check out.

I do not have great expectations, though. I expect only a very adventurous few people will even venture out onto the site — which is situated in a rather remote, uncharted territory. All kidding aside, PHLAT.net — as well as most PHLAT.net network sites — do not use data encryption … and therefore also do not use data encryption certificates … which is completely no problem because these sites do not collect any sensitive data. Companies like Google (and most other “Silicon Valley” upstarts), which collect TONS of data about their users DO NOT LIKE anything without data collection and so such companies are VERY BIG about campaigning against anything which doesn’t collect data about users. This is why many Internet browsers present warning messages whenever a site does not use data encryption certificates — because there is a huge mob of 800-pound gorillas breathing down their necks to do so. I will write another article about this problem (on another site, and I will be sure to post a pingback link here) … in a few days or maybe a couple weeks. I wrote this here and now mainly as a WARNING about the possible WARNING messages.

If you want to know more about PHLAT.net, you can also visit the PHLAT.news.blog (proudly hosted @ WordPress 😉 ) … and read all about how Wants.Blog is now supporting this project (in “Founding members of PHLAT.net (network) — Unite!“) … you could even interact, ask questions, get answers and all sorts of fun stuff like that! (but please don’t let me distract you in case you are also busy vacationing 😀 )

Doing the things that we want to

Keywords: essay , dream , dreaming , dreams , hobbies , hobby , hobbyist , hobbyists , human , humanity , humans , science , scientific , scientist , scientists

Today I want to test out a new type of post. Here, I want to feature someone’s writing that isn’t exactly about wanting per se … but which (I feel) is nonetheless relevant to our collective interest in wants.

Through their hobbies they became the first modern scientists

https://trust.science.blog/2023/03/03/through-their-hobbies-they-became-the-first-modern-scientists

Everywhere Plans for Everybody

That’s the quintessential motto of each and every pandemic: Everywhere Plans for Everybody

It’s not normal — not new normal, not old normal, not at all … it’s more God-like.

Normal is: Somewhere Plans for Somebody.

In case you’re unaware of this bit of cultural history: It was none other than the Beatles who sang about Nowhere Man … namely, that he had Nowhere Plans for Nobody.

I think many people treat me (and / or my thoughts) that way regarding my thinking about information , information retrieval, natural language processing, etc. They consider my ideas to be irrelevant to today’s “real world” — #IRL.

I wrote about this yesterday — see: “We saw with the pandemic that some organizations that struggled with change, and others that changed quickly” (the title is a quote taken from a recent interview with Charlene Li).

At the end of the post, I speculate about the divergence between my own views and the mainstream views of the masses in the markets. I think perhaps each of these extremes views the other view as “Nowhere Man” views (interesting aside: the Beatles actually sang that Nowhere Man “doesn’t have a point of view”, and also speculated whether “isn’t he a bit like you and me?”).

So where is this “real world”? Are the markets always right? If so, then how can it be that the markets still have not solved the problem sometimes referred to as the “pandemic”?