#201
i need you all to believe that i used to be a good poster though an infrequent one and it seems every time i come back i say the same things over again. i am very predictable apparently. oits importnant to me thjat you dont think i was always this unfunny , and also crazy. its actually freaking me out what im doing right now looking back at how i used to post and how people received what i said. jesus christ. sorry for dumping yet more bullshit on this but lol this is rpetty bad i dont think i realzied just how bad im doing at the moment. should uh.. do something but i dont even know what at this point.
#202
that deep sort of humanity you're talking about is pain and it's universal to all three lacanian buckets or whatever. everyone is traumatized and everyone is biologically inclined to find adaptations to their traumatizing environments (starting with the womb). these adaptations are a requirement for our survival and so you're right to be grateful for the internet. you ask addicts what the cocaine/alcohol/weed/meth/gaming/porn/internet/upvote does for them and it's all good stuff. the object of addiction provides a semblance of community, comfort, love, shelter, control, escape from emotional pain/stress. these are all universal human needs. the question is why is the addict lacking community, comfort, love, shelter, control. thankfully no one here is guilty of reducing the question of addiction to a hereditary/biological problem (liberal medical model) or an individual choice (liberal justice model), but it's worth saying that coping with trauma is not a choice or a genetic disorder. and these adaptations go beyond what we would usually call addictions of course. it's certain that all neurotic patterns are coping mechanisms. but no matter what the flavor is the mechanism inevitably proves to be maladaptive and self-reinforcing.

"the marxist as an accidental form of neurosis" that i suggested earlier in this thread is maybe better off formulated as "the marxist as a maladaptive coping mechanism." i've said elsewhere on this forum that this was me: "(i had convinced myself that it was "capitalism" causing my decline -- this was a reproduction of the extremely selfish politics typical for a first worlder.)"

clearly this is also you: "I would not be a communist without it" (it's great that you are a communist of course). the thing is that you don't need lacan or marx or an internet community of marxists or whatever. imo it has nothing to do with the argument about text being misleading. it has to do with the fact that books and posts will never truly hold you close and assure you that you are safe and loved. there's just no substitute for undiluted humanity. the tragedy is that we don't need our parents anymore but we think we do. we're adults now and we can be our own parents and we can seek out community if only we could accept the situation
#203

graphicalUSSRinterface posted:

pogfan1996 posted:

I hope you find what you're looking for

This isn't very nice but I guess I shouldn't expect engagement with my ideas from anyone here at this point.


this crosses a line imo. pogfan was being sincere afaik when he said that but your response says a lot about how you're choosing to engage with this place - ignoring the insights we offer and barreling ahead with mindless posts about how you feel about every little thing in the moment you type the post.

and the way you post IS a choice, despite your disavowal of any responsibility for it because of the brain issues you keep going on and on about. we get it, you have struggles. newsflash: we all do. it's all relative, and your struggles are no doubt harder than a lot of other posters' struggles, but that doesn't negate anyone else's situation, and those of us who have been posting here for years need this place to function properly more than we need new posters coming in here to shit all over everything. sorry but, against my better judgement, i agree with swampman (that's a little posting humour there, in that i have had disagreements with swampy in the past!!): regular posters were too nice to you at first, myself included, and it was a mistake.

lurk the fuck more or go away. this forum isn't your personal brain toilet.

#204

Petrol posted:

this crosses a line imo. pogfan was being sincere afaik when he said that but your response says a lot about how you're choosing to engage with this place - ignoring the insights we offer and barreling ahead with mindless posts about how you feel about every little thing in the moment you type the post.



it came across to me and to others i asked for clarification on, before i even made the reply, as passive-aggressive and insincere and i dont think id be wrong to read it that way as i did, especially considering the lack of further elaboration past that. you know every time ive misread something i immediately take back what i said. i post impulsively sometimes. i feel like pogfan and i post very differently in general and i frequently feel misread and/or misinterpreted by him, not that thats anyones fault, because we have very different posting styles and im new anyways so itd be understandable regardless. and my reply indicates that i was ignoring his insights? really? i feel like i offered a thorough response outlining my differences on that point. i believe in online communities in a very sincere kind of way and i feel ive demonstrated that to an extreme degree my entire time posting here, i talk about it all the time. if anything i read pogfan's reply as a passive-aggressive way of stating his unwillingness to take online relationships seriously in a very dismissive manner, which is why i said what i did lol, in addition to feeling like my posts are overlooked generally and feeling isolated here which i have put a ton of thought into elaborating in depth, which swampman did not seem to want to engage in good faith with whatsoever

Petrol posted:

and the way you post IS a choice, despite your disavowal of any responsibility for it because of the brain issues you keep going on and on about. we get it, you have struggles. newsflash: we all do. it's all relative, and your struggles are no doubt harder than a lot of other posters' struggles, but that doesn't negate anyone else's situation, and those of us who have been posting here for years need this place to function properly more than we need new posters coming in here to shit all over everything. sorry but, against my better judgement, i agree with swampman (that's a little posting humour there, in that i have had disagreements with swampy in the past!!): regular posters were too nice to you at first, myself included, and it was a mistake.



i get that sincere sadposting shitting up all the threads is obnoxious, i hate that shit too. my reasons for it dont make it okay i guess but its very hard to reach out to people at first in a friendly way about whatever, because i was here for having a hard time in the first place with the loss of a community and in particular one poster i had been close with for a decade, and their solution is a temporary ifap or suggesting i get irl friends instead, and none of my feelings are in any way engaged with, which is what ive been griping about increasingly desperately over time. everyone on here is weirdly distant and will not engage with my posts really. shitty sadposts or not. i think the most i recall is bhpn and possibly cars on that initial effortpost i made about PA when i started posting here again and i only made that out of pressure to defend myself from skepticism and hostility. i did it to prove myself lmfao because i felt i had to. i dunno dude.

#205
i cant force this community to be different than it is, for sure. but i figured sticking around would probably be worth it and id adjust into the routine idk. i dont know. ive explained some of my reasons for posting that way in depth already. a lot of it is impulsivity too i jsut fucking post which i also talked about to some extent i think. dumping this shit everywhere is bad. it sucks and is annoying and ruins things for other people. my first reply to swampman is probably what i should stick to in terms of practical solutions if i stay. probably need some dedicated thread for dumping thast stuff or else to put it somewhere. but i dont really think it would make anyone want to engage with me in the way i need/want/hope for.. i want like again, friends. and its hard when people keep their distance and in a weird like, concerned/disdainful way from the very beginning when i was much more cautious about waht i posted. i felt weird here from the first stupid shitposts i made, people not understanding the joke about my analyst for instance, so then having to explain everything defensively, and increasingly having to explain myself over suspicion and misinterpretation because i dont want to give up on this place lol and i want it to work, because i do value a lot of what people post here. maybe my choice of self-disclosure was wrong. but also im desperate and not doing well and with the kinds of responses/lack of responses i was faced with im just kind of spiralling in a bad situation, not that that makes it fun for any of you. i dont know. lol. this isnt my best post really. whatever haha


--------///-----------
while you work through this it's probably best to restrict your posting on the main forum as it doesn't seem to be doing you any favours.
you can still message other posters individually and unload posts freely in your own thread in ifap which will get autodeleted when you are released.
you're welcome to come back to contribute on the main forum once you feel the spiraling and impulsivity subside.
-------///------------

Edited by Gssh ()

#206

graphicalUSSRinterface posted:

how the hell was i pulling 19 upvotes two years ago for doing the same fucking shit but worse.


#207

graphicalUSSRinterface posted:

everyone on here is weirdly distant


its an irony thing

#208
just read the article heres my thoughts on it. if "left twitter" is such an unnerving space where everything is trivialized its because of the functional nature of virtual parasocial spaces, which are - for now at least - used in a frivolous manner. despite what anyone might say about the frivolous/serious dichotomy or the virtual/real dichotomy being obsolete, its still a staple when looking at almost every subcultures on these social websites that are simulations of real, physical subcultures - i think this trend might be avoided in subcultures that only exists on the internet and are shunned physically, like kooky esoteric conspiracies or anime or somthing.
their backbone and what makes the true potential and spirit of said subcultures, particularly when it comes to an all encompassing worldview like marxism, is totally scraped away to be used as speech commodities for individual social gain, popularity. this is blatant when it comes to a character limit website like twitter where theres a 2 hundred or so character ( not even word) limit per tweet, forcing the hand of the user to write everything in the slogan form like the author explains. by expressing every little thing through the format of the slogan the user is forced to become the publicist of himself, to balance his own individuality and the norms of the subculture he belongs to in the eternal effort for popularity. Obviously this self interest added to a stunted posting format is only harmful to any element of the subculture being displayed. The user doesn't wish to inform about external elements but to inform about himself using said external elements as a vector for his displayed self. At best this only serves at propelling opportunists in the perpertual chase for a blue thing next to their display name or for the most talented a columnist position in some political magazine.
The stunted quality of the content and the promotion of individualities resulting in 'oppression olympics' as the author calls it isnt something thats unique to left twitter in my opinion. Relay of disinfo is due to popularity induced clientelism leading to a big loop of shit retweet and the 'posturing' as oppressed is something thats more proper to political subcultures or subcultures in general which through its relative isolation to a perceived normative 'main-culture' (this is very well identified by the mythical figure of the 'normie' that emerged in the last decade) will feel like being crushed. everyone feels disenfranchised because something theyve linked their identity to and which starts to rub off on their physical identity because of the hours put in in the quest for middle school like popularity cause some type of disconnection from physical, immediate norms, trends, values etc. This is actually good cause it exposes virtual big shots for being nothing but paper tigers, no matter their spot on the political spectrum. People whos political struggle is expressed through frivolous jokes cant be revolutionary, at best the political spectrum turns into a spectrum picturing the varying degree of which they suck up to big corporations and mass produced 'popular' culture. And i know this might sound judgemental or something but even for those who are really disenfranchised (matter of fact, even those who feel disenfranchisement but really are not), internet communities where they can meet will offer nothing but immediate emotional support at best which will quickly fade away as soon as they shut the screens off. In fact the norms learned through these virtual communities will, in a dialectical manner, clash with the norms of the physical world, pushing the person away and breeding a stronger and stronger desire for escapism. its like that anime with the girl who spends too much time on the internet and becomes a computer or something. Although it might be a good tool for meeting alike people and forming immediate physical networks, parasocial tools being consumed and disappearing in the process
anyway i lost the thread of what i was getting at so ill finish by saying that parasocial spaces wont ever serve the liberation of the people, at least not in our lifetimes. afraid im gonna sound like a luddite but I think its counter productive function is too pervasive to simply be ignored and should actually be fought against. and personally i learned a lot from checking out stuff on the internet but thats because i didnt waste time with making virtual friends along the process, i just took use of the evergrowing ecosystem of archived content for what it was worth and kept the social aspect to a minimum
#209
Parasociality involves completely assymetrical 'interactions' with a single participant and no actual communication taking place. On twitter or whatever it would only exist in cases of fake accounts, or whjen where someone without as many twitter points follows someone with a ton of twitter poitns and the first person sees the second one in their twitter feed and the second one doesn't see them much less interact with them, and with the first person considering that person their friend. What you're talking about is something more complicated than just parasocial, "parasocial spaces" only exist in the minds of the respective subject of a given parasocial interaction.
#210

chickeon posted:

Parasociality involves completely assymetrical 'interactions' with a single participant and no actual communication taking place. On twitter or whatever it would only exist in cases of fake accounts, or whjen where someone without as many twitter points follows someone with a ton of twitter poitns and the first person sees the second one in their twitter feed and the second one doesn't see them much less interact with them, and with the first person considering that person their friend. What you're talking about is something more complicated than just parasocial, "parasocial spaces" only exist in the minds of the respective subject of a given parasocial interaction.



True, which brings me to a point that I don't think those who are too young to know a world without social media will grasp:

McLuhan's analysis of mediums is just as apt in all of this. Twitter bears little difference from television and radio. As the accurately stated above, people with lots of Twitter points reach a broad audience, and people with comparatively little Twitter points reach no one by comparison. So there's no difference in a Twitter account with a million followers and a cable TV opinion show host. The big Twitter point people are telling the audience their thing, and the audience can take it or leave it but not push back against it individually; it's a one-way dialogue that places power entirely on one half of the conversation. People by and large don't grasp that change in social dynamic reflected in the medium itself. This is evidenced by the fact that someone would come to this completely different medium of a forum, which is designed to facilitate replies rather than discrete posts, and posts constant spam as they would post on Twitter, and then completely miss the boat by analysing their success or failure based on how many people clicked the green button versus how many people quoted and replied to their posts.

The redeeming quality of Twitter is it does grant the ability for the masses to collectively harass professional journos, so there's that, but that requires those people to know each other outside of Twitter somehow. As of today on the left there's the podcast circuit that allows such a thing, but that's not a thing exclusive to the left. It's just as well (if not more) represented on the far right. I question whether this dynamic of people organized away from social media harassing people on social media will last, though. Every year there's a new plan floated from Twitter's management to implement a feature which will allow a protected class of users to censor the unwashed masses who gang up on them. These have been short lived only because Twitter and Facebook see the decline in points that such measures create, and the social media companies are as bound to the notion of Twitter points to sell advertising as the users are bound to the notion of Twitter points as a means of keeping score. As time goes on the social media companies will find newer and more creative ways to generate fake Twitter points which aren't derived from the previous metrics created by television, print, and radio. The new Twitter points will be easier to manipulate behind the scenes, and they'll be able to roll out fully protected classes on their platforms as they wish they could do now.

Just in the last couple of days Twitter applied their fist use of a warning flag that told users a video was "manipulated." It was posted by one of Trump's digital comms lackeys and had a clip of Biden stammering through one of his dementia-laced speeches only to wind up accidentally saying "we can only re-elect Trump." The video wasn't manipulated at all, it was only cropped to fit the frame it was placed in and audio-normalized with the background music. The instant backlash from the entire Twitter political spectrum caused them to quickly recant and remove the flag from the video, but it seems pretty obvious to me that they are already building tools to allow a protected class to not only monopolize information but also tell the audience how they must interpret it. Facebook is fully mask-off in all of this. They've given a far-right media company that has published neo-Nazis the ability to "fact-check" content on their platform and flag anything they disagree with for all users.

WebAssembly is the coup-de-grace. I don't see how it can represent anything except turning anything that connects to the internet back into a television, in which the user has only a menial facade of interaction, and is instead of a user more like a fool sat on a couch to consume the ads foisted upon him/her through the device they are looking at.

Edited by Over9000ft ()

#211

chickeon posted:

Parasociality involves completely assymetrical 'interactions' with a single participant and no actual communication taking place. On twitter or whatever it would only exist in cases of fake accounts, or whjen where someone without as many twitter points follows someone with a ton of twitter poitns and the first person sees the second one in their twitter feed and the second one doesn't see them much less interact with them, and with the first person considering that person their friend.


i feel like parasocial is expanding in context from the original coined psych term (the perceived relationship to a specific personality) to encompass the other ways that illusory placebo sociality manifests online, and the term is probably still the best fit?

#212

Over9000ft posted:

WebAssembly is the coup-de-grace. I don't see how it can represent anything except turning anything that connects to the internet back into a television, in which the user has only a menial facade of interaction, and is instead of a user more like a fool sat on a couch to consume the ads foisted upon him/her through the device they are looking at.


i think it's worse than this, because there's that intoxicating feeling of participation.

thousands of people dogpiling in on some big political gaffe tweet that'll be forgotten by tomorrow to dunk in with their own personal prepackaged reaction image, or to try counting coup on someone doing the above or whatever, and there's no actual interaction taking place. aside from maybe a little emotional catharsis, some high fives, nothing is accomplished. no one has communicated, no one has done anything to manifest a material change in reality, but they feel like they have. an enclave of dozens of posters reminding each other that donald trump is orange 300 times a day because they're afraid and need to vent begin to feel like they're making a difference, because they're hungry for that feeling. they grow attached to feeling like they've done something, they encyst themselves and withdraw from any possibility of actually accomplishing anything, sometimes they even get furiously defensive if that illusion of participation is challenged.

"parasocial space" seems pretty apt to me to describe that kind of futile pseudocommunity.

even in our own pedigreed traditions of posting, gotta be aware of the limitations of a space like ours. I've had my words to say in the past about how people shouldn't look to this site as a transformative political force. this place is important to me! and it's not useless. i'm proud of a lot of things people here have written and done. but this irony forum fundamentally resides at a lower valence than actual organized political work. this is ok! we should all just be mindful not to fall into that counterproductive trap of confusing the two.

#213

chickeon posted:

Parasociality involves completely assymetrical 'interactions' with a single participant and no actual communication taking place. On twitter or whatever it would only exist in cases of fake accounts, or whjen where someone without as many twitter points follows someone with a ton of twitter poitns and the first person sees the second one in their twitter feed and the second one doesn't see them much less interact with them, and with the first person considering that person their friend. What you're talking about is something more complicated than just parasocial, "parasocial spaces" only exist in the minds of the respective subject of a given parasocial interaction.



yeah my bad i forgot what the original meaning of the word was and thought it could be applied to interaction that uses communication oriented mass media as its basis. what i wanted to signify what that interactions on the net have different rituals, norms around them that creates a differentiation gap from physical interactions. maybe altsocial would be more fitting i dont know
but as over3000ft pointed out twitter, in addition to being the proponent for emerging personalities who escape the virtual 'commoner' experience to rise and join the stars theres also a fair share of accounts that simply are people who have some degree of notoriety in the physical social space and thus could have parasocial interactions with their follower base. What twitter introduces is that every subculture can have this type of stratification like the movie metropolis, with a chosen few living & interacting above the heads of the unwashed masses and the masses picking at the crumbs of info/disinfo that fall on their heads without ever questioning the legitimity of said content. Parasocial interaction doesnt even have to be conveyed through some type of esoteric sphere like mainstream journalism, the culture industry and so on. someone can rake in retweets and followers without even leaving his room and thats messed up, particularly when all the little rituals developped over time virtually rub off on already existing rituals, speech, norms from the physical world and particularly for people whos main goal is taking down the capitalist mode of production. twitter particularly is the perfect tool for reactionary propaganda as it creates a false sense of proximity between users

#214
What would it take to physically destroy the twitter websight? do they have a really big computer somewhere... is it too distributed to drive a truck through?
#215
imo if we’re discussing parasociality and Twitter, it matters that one phenomenon Twitter has pushed to the forefront of the media is when someone with way fewer eyes on them posts something at someone with tens of thousands to millions of followers, whether that’s the person the big account claims to represent or a proxy for that person, and the big account responds in a way that shows ass and a bunch of people make fun of them until they quit in an overwrought display of anger or self-flagellation, or says they were hacked or the intern was fired or whatever. or they don’t respond until other people pile on and maybe it ends up in a Buzzfeed headline and the big account switches to the same sort of damage control. That’s not the usual thing “parasocial” describes.
#216
i have thoughts about some of what you have all been saying but instead of sharing them i want to shame you for giving this much of a shit about twitter. if this thread continues it belongs with the other twitter thread in endless shrimp imo
#217
you are all brain poisoned. none of you are free of social media brain poisoning.
#218

tears posted:

you are all brain poisoned. none of you are free of social media brain poisoning.


The people were ASTONISHED at her doctrine.

#219

Over9000ft posted:

WebAssembly is the coup-de-grace.


i don't mean to drag out technical details if they're not really relevant but what in tarnation are you trying to say about webassembly?

#220

chickeon posted:

What would it take to physically destroy the twitter websight? do they have a really big computer somewhere... is it too distributed to drive a truck through?



It's not feasible.

Such big sites services are distributed across multiple locations around the world. There is no single physical place to attack. Even if you manage to attack one, the others would automatically pick up the slack in less than 10 seconds. The users wouldn't even notice a hiccup if you blew up a whole datacenter.

nearlyoctober posted:

i don't mean to drag out technical details if they're not really relevant but what in tarnation are you trying to say about webassembly?



As of right now, over half of the WebAssembly code in the wild is used for malware, the overwhelming number of that subset being stealing the user's electricity for crypto mining. Javascript already went too far, particularly in terms of uglifiers. Giving the javascript sandbox lower-level access to devices and the ability to call pre-compiled code will not benefit users nearly as much as it will benefit nefarious corporations and governments in a capitalist world. WebAssembly's obvious purpose is to further separate internet users from control of what they see, and give that control to corporate media and advertising companies. A side benefit for those tech conglomerates will be enhanced surveillance capability for their FBI and CIA contracts.

Edited by Over9000ft ()

#221

chickeon posted:

What would it take to physically destroy the twitter websight? do they have a really big computer somewhere... is it too distributed to drive a truck through?


maybe this article from a few years ago is relevant here, it's about how someone could theoretically destroy the internet's physical infrastructure: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/how-to-destroy-the-internet-but-please-dont/

#222
i almost finished typing out 2 paragraphs to argue in defense of webassembly on the rhizzone but i deleted it. i believe i may be overcoming brain poisoning. either way thanks for the food for thought. i think a real possibility is that webassembly opens the door for developers to leverage existing computer vision and other such high-performance data libraries for in-browser villainy. there probably are or will soon be brazen cases of facebook moving their costly facial interpretation modules or whatever to the browser. perhaps a more palatable kkkonspiracy is that software shops are excited for webassembly so they don't have to pay to port code from javascript and for other such opportunities.
#223

lo posted:

chickeon posted:


What would it take to physically destroy the twitter websight? do they have a really big computer somewhere... is it too distributed to drive a truck through?


maybe this article from a few years ago is relevant here, it's about how someone could theoretically destroy the internet's physical infrastructure: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/07/how-to-destroy-the-internet-but-please-dont/



506 registered users on the rhizzone could destroy the important cables and one data center

#224
You are all missing the obvious method of choice for both ease and effectiveness which is to assassinate all executives and directors of the twitter corporation and blow up all its offices simultaneously.
#225
This is beginning to sound a lot like a shitty book and equally shitty movie.
#226

Populares posted:

This is beginning to sound a lot like a shitty book and equally shitty movie.


a small price to pay for a world without twitter

#227
no twitter, no movies
#228
after much deliberation the official rhizzone position is: no movies. still pictures only
#229
gifs are market socialism
#230

Petrol posted:

after much deliberation the official rhizzone position is: no movies. still pictures only



like I'm grateful for your work making pages load, but Absolutely No we are not "ready to declare" as an entire Web site some cable news United $nakkke$ electoral betting pool proclamation.

#231
failover vs Fail AIDS
#232

tears posted:

like I'm grateful for your work making pages load, but Absolutely No we are not "ready to declare" as an entire Web site some cable news United $nakkke$ electoral betting pool proclamation.


another catchphrase..... my posting power grows...

#233
this forum's apprehension of social media is tv tropes-tier and over the last several years, the posts have become reddit-ish in concept and energy.
#234
Good self-crit.
#235
embracing the social media brain poisoning
#236
So is the gist here that people's behaviour on social media is partly due to the trauma experienced by having to use social media?
#237

dimashq posted:

this forum's apprehension of social media is tv tropes-tier and over the last several years, the posts have become reddit-ish in concept and energy.


#238
For Every Engagement You Don't Get, I'll Get Three
#239

nearlyoctober posted:

i almost finished typing out 2 paragraphs to argue in defense of webassembly on the rhizzone but i deleted it. i believe i may be overcoming brain poisoning. either way thanks for the food for thought. i think a real possibility is that webassembly opens the door for developers to leverage existing computer vision and other such high-performance data libraries for in-browser villainy. there probably are or will soon be brazen cases of facebook moving their costly facial interpretation modules or whatever to the browser. perhaps a more palatable kkkonspiracy is that software shops are excited for webassembly so they don't have to pay to port code from javascript and for other such opportunities.



I get that knee-jerk condemnations of WebAssembly are usually wrong, and have been guilty of the same myself, but I think you have to consider intent and the flow of a request.

The defense is that "oh you can still see the code with dev tools," great... but I can't intercept it, can I? At least not nearly as easy as say... current ad-blockers do. So "you can still see the code" comes with the caveat that (as I understand it) you can only see the code after it's been foisted upon you and executed unless you want to create and run some sort of middleware which will make performance an order of magnitude worse than current un-compiled javascript implementations.

As for intent, Facebook's intent is to listen to and transcribe my phone calls and give that data to Peter Thiel so he can sell it to the NSA/CIA, I have no doubt of that.

If I'm wrong about my criticism of WebAssembly above I'd happily hear why if you use it, btw. My understanding is simply from reading the spec, I have not used it myself.

#240
thanks for reminding me to disable webassembly