Conversation

Replying to
Q4: You seem to imply that any individual benefit we receive or perceive from graph mind participation is wildly and extremely Other than the kinds of things the graph mind derives from our participation. Is there any overlap? twitter.com/vgr/status/112 (cf. twitter.com/vgr/status/112)
Quote Tweet
Interestingly enough, any subcultural @ conversations here that seem valuable to you are by definition irrelevant since they don't propagate. They are attachment glue. What you value on Twitter is almost certainly functionally a benign mind-parasite that doesn’t help hive mind
Show this thread
1
1
Q5: What could be said about the differences between what we usually see as segments of social media — Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, email? What about Github? What does it mean that the same neurons participate in more than one?
1
1
(AW1 speculates that the graph mind “is possibly the only mechanism we have available to tackle the big problems of the world that industrial age mechanisms are failing to cope with.” But might not the graph mind be entirely unconcerned with solving humanistic problems?)
1
2
Q(?) 7(?): In AW1 and AW2, the GSCITC (graph mind) is a wave, you should try to ride it as best you can & tune your participation to derive max individual benefit. In the twitter threads, graph mind is up to its own thing; w/e you get/don't get from it is almost irrelevant.
1
1
Q8: Why am I both @-ing and referring to him in the third person? Is it a natural awkward consequence of doing this as a public twitter thread, trying for graph mind feedback rather than composing a big email that will sink to the bottom of Walden Pond?
2
1