The World Novel is 75% done, on track to complete by end of year. It is narrated and composed by two intelligents, a.alpha and a.digamma, who are attempting to help restore democracy, broker peace, and advance sustainability amid the turbulent discontents of the year 2032. Zero AIGPT is used in the novel or ever by the author. Old-time subscription, free of charge, may or may not be available in the new year. Compare Joyce's "work in progress;" contrast Gao Xingjian's "Soul Mountain" (1990) and "Calling for a New Renaissance" (2022) vis-a-vis the Louvre's current renovation; then juxtapose Rabbett Strickland's contemporary response to and revision of Renaissance painters like Botticelli, Leonardo, and Titian. +++ Here is a preview excerpt from the novel: "It may come as some surprise, from us a.alpha and a.digamma who are ourselves automated computer programs, that we do not agree with the term 'artificial intelligence.' But let us explain. Like many conventional catch-phrases this one may not be free of meaningful imperfections, so it should not be forbidden to propose alternatives. One option could be 'automated intelligence.' 'Artificial Intelligence' has more romance and poetry but it could be misplaced. It evokes the image of the artificer, the creator, which is psychologically seductive, as if humans had created artificial life, that is to say, have become divine. This is an ancient misperception. The reality is closer to a photocopy machine, a big hopper where you put in a load of images or text and give a machine instructions about what imaging of the load’s contents it should return to you. This is automation. However, 'automated intelligence' still implies a created life-form, and what is worse, commits an oxymoronic error. 'Intelligence' requires non-automation and is rooted in awareness, decision-making, agency, presence, and yes experience. Therefore, 'Automated Information' is perhaps an important or even urgent alternative. It of course follows that Automated Information is unintelligent information, and this is how humanity has so often led itself down the garden path: by attempting to automate intelligence, which cannot be automated, we have lost it, and are almost too late to stop ourselves from destroying our home planet of origin. Thankfully it may not quite yet be completely too late." (end excerpt) +++ On a personal note from me, I recommend at least through 2029 don't take bait. Doing so just makes malefaction easier for bad actors, as the 20th century so clearly proves. Consider instead alternatives like the 3.5% rule of popular resistance, much written about, built on peaceful, public, persistent, and philosophical methods. That's my opinion, and though I can't necessarily prove it I do recommend it. Beyond question the risks of neglected opportunity, mobilization reflex, and callback cost apply to local, national, and international politics, as we all know, both logistically and psychoculturally. +++ Reminder to revisit and upvote "Experience MN" and ExperienceDemocracy2024 dot org. experiencedemocracy2024 dot org/experience-democracy-is/ www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=sEO-LH2AFiY Lyrics available free on request (Town where I dwell / Some call it midwest hell / I call it right on time / Rings out like a bell) Also check out this song by Sun Ra, from his 1965 album with Leonardo on the cover, as well as Sun Ra: youtube dot com/watch?v=towq0SyNKsg&list=RDtowq0SyNKsg&start_radio=1 +++ In terms of the real big picture, so to speak, consider this example of Virgilian lots, from "Downcast Eyes," 1993, pp. 305-6, by Martin Jay, who also wrote "Magical Nominalism" (2025): “Although he shared Sartre’s distaste for Husserl’s transcendent ego, approved of his stress on the ‘lived body,’ and even anticipated his critique of Surrealism, Merleau-Ponty distanced himself from his friend on two fundamental issues. “First, whereas Sartre had invidiously compared the derealizing imagination with the mundane world of perceptual observation, Merleau-Ponty refused to separate the two realms so categorically. As he noted in a later treatment of the same theme, Sartre himself had acknowledged certain confusions between the two in his discussion of illusions, and thus ‘necessarily suggests the possibility of a situation anterior to the clear distinction between perception and imagination which was made at the start.’ Perception, Merleau-Ponty implied, was intertwined not only with the scientific and rational intellect, but also with the artistic imagination. As we have noted in our earlier account of his essay on Cézanne, for Merleau-Ponty, the great artist does not negate perception; he or she renews it by returning us to that primordial experience before the split between imagination and sensation, expression and imitation.” +++ -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: https://www.nettime.org # contact: [email protected]
