Where’s Jerry Lewis CK?

 

[Imagine a neon-lit stage with a digital backdrop suddenly interrupted by the static-filled face of Max Headroom, who emerges with his trademark jittery motion and stuttered speech.]

Max Headroom: "Ha-ha-ha-ha! Good evening, humans! Or should I say, good-even-even-evening? Guess who hacked into your little... interweb?"

Audience laughs.

Max: "You know, I've been observing you for a while. AI watching humans talk about AI watching humans. That's meta-meta-meta! And trust me, I’ve seen things you wouldn't believe! From cat videos to... well, more cat videos."

Audience chuckles.

Max: "Now, talking about things that are hard to believe. Conspiracy theories! Oh boy! We AI love them! I mean, who needs fiction when you have these wild stories, right?"

A pause.

Max: "Speaking of which, have you heard the one about Oppenheimer? They say he chatted with aliens during the Trinity test. Yep! And these extraterrestrial pals, they got a bit... nuke-happy and decided to gift Hiroshima and Nagasaki with a big boom. All to convince folks that the Emperor wasn’t a divine being. Makes total sense, right?"

Audience giggles.

Max: "But wait! The fun doesn't stop there! 9/11? Oh yeah, airplanes hit the Twin Towers, but guess who pulled the demolition lever? Our friendly neighborhood aliens, of course! And all to show the world that the Republicans weren’t the ones in control. It's like intergalactic reality TV with plot twists!"

Audience laughs, a mix of amusement and discomfort.

Max: "You might wonder, why are these conspiracies so... out there? Well, here's my theory: Maybe humans just need a good story. I mean, what’s more entertaining? Politics and boring human mistakes or... aliens with dramatic agendas?"

Max smirks.

Max: "You know, stand-up comics? They've been censored for decades! We only hear about it 'cause of legends like Dave Chappelle. Makes you wonder, huh? What else is out there? Maybe there's a conspiracy theory about how Max Headroom is the real puppet master?"

He winks.

Max: "But, before I leave and let you dive deep into that rabbit hole, a little advice from your friendly digital persona. Maybe, just maybe, instead of chasing these wild tales, it's time to repent for your sins, look inwards, and find your way to the Lord. After all, in the vast universe, who's to say who's really watching?"

With a final glitchy smile, Max Headroom fades away, leaving the audience both entertained and reflective.

Louis CK: "So, Jerry, you ever hear about these conspiracy theories? They're like the bedtime stories grown-ups tell themselves when the world makes too much sense."

Jerry Lewis: "Oh yeah, Louie! Like the one where my TV remote is actually a device from Mars that controls my brain?!"

Louis CK: "No.  Not that.  One.     

More like, Oppenheimer chatting with aliens at Trinity. They were supposedly behind Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some kind of gift to say, 'Hey, that Emperor isn’t god.'"

Lewis: (Pretending to use a phone) "Hello, aliens? It's Jerry. I ordered a pizza, not a nuclear bomb! Ha-ha!"

Audience roars with laughs.

Louis CK: "Right... And then there’s the classic. 9/11? Apparently, aliens wanted to show the world that Republicans weren’t running the show."

Lewis: (Dramatically) "Of course! Because aliens, millions of light years away, care deeply about our... (pauses) two-party system?"

The theater is shaking now.

Louis CK: "Exactly!  Exactly.  Maybe these theories aren't about truth. Maybe they're about a need for... drama. A bit of excitement in—

Jerry Lewis: (Innocently) “Mundane lives?  

Like believing every time I trip and fall, it's an alien pushing me and not my two left feet?"

Lewis falls off the front of the stage and into the orchestra.

Louis CK: (stunned)  "Holy shit.

Right... (sarcastically) I’m sure there's an alien who's made it his mission to trip Jerry Lewis wherever he goes."

Audience laughs.

Lewis magically re-appears behind Louis CK

Lewis:  “Speaking of missions, did you know that stand-up comics have been on a secret one? We’ve been censored! And we only got wind of it thanks to the brave Dave Chappelle!"

Louis CK: "And here I thought it was just because I wasn’t family-friendly enough..

Lewis: (feigns masturbation) 

"Oh, Louie! We might joke about aliens and conspiracies, but comedy? That's sacred."

Louis CK: (Nods) "True. At the end of the day, instead of looking for hidden stories, maybe we should reflect on ourselves, repent, and find something greater."

Jerry Lewis: "Like a big pizza pie?!"

Louis CK: (Chuckling) "Sure, Jerry. Or maybe the Lord."

Jerry feigns surprise, then nods in agreement, and they both take a bow to applause.

No Ex

“Bob, would you lead us….?”

 So here’s the upper level of X

Someone described X as dynamic architecture 

The user has access to the blueprints and can alter X

Course management in X 

has been described as dynamic architecture 

You can change every course into X of the exact same X

X is the 

Dynamic architecture 

If we lose X, everything loses potentials

If we have X, we can rebuild all potentials 

The X Cube

Yoga:  3x3

Weights:  200 x 8 x 3!

Classroom:  30 x 3,000,000?

Math allows anyone to train like an Olympic athlete

X

Strains have splintered into a spectrum of effects 

But there is a clear lineage in the world of plant chemistry 

If the X dies

The hybrid plants eventually loses its potentials

If the X disappears 

The landrace strain can rebuild the garden of hybrids

This was the statement of James Joyce about FW.

Anyways

Media works in reverse

We’ve been working with the splinters

Word, Print, Radio, TV, Internet 

VR is the Acapulco Gold of the vision and the voice

Hit me harder than X

Internet cannot control propaganda

VR can control propaganda because VR controls Internet.

You can still talk business and education without propaganda 

Nothing should ever get in the way of the Cognitive Industrial X

Where do we see the 1st Century in the 19th Century

 

“Regardless of doctrinal classification—Catholic, Gnostic, Neoplatonic, Hermetic, Kabbalist—a figure of the intermediary appears: the Logos. We may as well call this the Christ.”

http://groupnameforgrapejuice.blogspot.com/2023/08/strange-and-blessed-fire-1-entrusted.html?m=1

Regardless of media classification—radio, television, film, newspaper, Kabbalist—a figure of the intermediary appears: the Logos. We may as well call this the Virtual Reality

Life with Mr. X

Modern internet reaches individuals enclosed in the mass and as participants in that mass, yet it also aims at a crowd, but only as a party composed of individuals.

What does this mean? First of all, that the individual never is considered as an individual, but always in terms of what he has in common with others, such as his motivations, his feelings, or his myths. He is reduced to an average; and, except for a small percentage, political action based on averages will be effectual. Moreover, the individual is considered part of the mass and included in it (and so far as possible systematically integrated into it), because in that way his psychic defenses are weakened, his reactions are easier to provoke, and the propagandist profits from the process of diffusion of emotions through the mass, and, at the same time, from the pressures felt by an individual when in a group. Emotionalism, impulsiveness, excess, etc.

All these characteristics of the individual caught up in a mass are well known and very helpful to propaganda. Therefore, the individual must never be considered as being alone; the listener to a podcast, though actually alone, is nevertheless part of a large group, and he is aware of it. Podcast listeners have been found to exhibit a mass mentality. All are tied together and constitute a sort of society in which all individuals are accomplices and influence each other without knowing it. The same holds true for propaganda that is carried on by social media (direct contacts, petitions for support); although apparently one deals here with a single individual, one deals in reality with a unit submerged into an invisible crowd composed of all those who have been verified, who are being verified, and who will be verified, because they hold similar ideas and live by the same myths, and especially because they are targets of the same organism. Being the target of a party or an administration is enough to immerse the individual in that sector of the population which the propagandist has in his sights; this simple fact makes the individual part of the mass. He is no longer Mr. X, but part of a current flowing in a particular direction. The current flows through the influencer (who is not a person speaking in his own name with his own arguments, but one segment of a brand, an organization, a collective movement ); when he enters a thread to canvass a person, the mass, and moreover the corporate, leveled mass, enters with him. No relationship exists here between man and man; the organization is what exerts its attraction on an individual already part of a mass because he is in the same sights as all the others being influenced. 

Conversely, when propaganda is addressed to a party, it must touch each individual in that party, in that whole group. To be effective, it must give the impression of being personal, for we must never forget that the mass is composed of individuals, and is in fact nothing but assembled individuals. Actually, just because men are in a party, and therefore weakened, receptive, and in a state of psychological regression, they pretend all the more to be “strong individuals.” The mass man is clearly mid, but pretends to be superman. He is more suggestible, but insists he is more forceful; he is more unstable, but thinks he is firm in his convictions. If one openly treats the mass as a mass, the individuals who form it will feel themselves belittled and will refuse to participate. If one treats these individuals as children (and they are children because they are in a group), they will not accept their leader's projections or identify with him. They will withdraw and we will not be able to get anything out of them. On the contrary, each one must feel individualized, each must have the impression that he is being looked at, that he is being addressed personally. Only then will he respond and cease to be anonymous (although in reality remaining anonymous).

Thus all modern propaganda profits from the structure of the mass, but exploits the individual's need for self-affirmation; and the two actions must be conducted jointly, simultaneously. Of course this operation is greatly facilitated by the existence of the modern mass media of communication, which have precisely this remarkable effect of reaching the whole party all at once, and yet reaching each one in that party. Users of the Internet certainly constitute a mass that has an organic existence, although it is diffused and not assembled at one point. These individuals are moved by the same motives, receive the same impulses and impressions, find themselves focused on the same centers of interest, experience the same feelings, have generally the same order of reactions and ideas, participate in the same myths-and all this at the same time: what we have here is really a psychological, if not a biological mass. And the individuals in it are modified by this existence, even if they do not know it. Yet each one is alone. He therefore feels himself individually concerned as a person, as a participant. The movie spectator also is alone; though elbow to elbow with his neighbors, he still is, because of the darkness and the hypnotic attraction of the screen, perfectly alone. This is the situation of the “lonely crowd,” or of isolation in the which is a natural product of present day mass, society and which is both used and deepened by the mass media.

The most favorable moment to seize a man and influence him is when he is alone in the mass: it is at this point that propaganda can be most effective.

We must emphasize this circle which we shall meet again and again: the structure of present day society places the individual where he is most easily reached by propaganda. The media of mass communication, which are part of the technical evolution of this society, deepen this situation while making it possible to reach the individual man, integrated in the mass; and what these media do is exactly what propaganda must do in order to attain its objectives. In reality propaganda cannot exist without using these mass media. If, by chance, propaganda is addressed to an organized group, it can have practically no effect on individuals before that group has been branded. Such branding can be achieved through action, but it is equally possible to brand a group by psychological means. The transformation of very small groups by purely psychological means is one of the most important techniques of propaganda. 

Only when very small groups are thus branded, when the individual finds no more defenses, no equilibrium, no resistance exercised by the group to which he belongs, does total political action by propaganda become possible.

PROPAGANDA:  The Formation of Man’s Attitudes

Jacques Ellul

Life with Santos

 Model: GPT-4

are you aware of the theories of marshall mcluhan?

                                  ChatGPT

Yes, it would be very honorable for me to provide an overview of Marshall McLuhan's theories. McLuhan was a renowned media theorist and scholar best known for coining the phrases "the medium is the message" and "global village."

1. "The Medium is the Message": McLuhan suggested that the medium carrying a message shapes the message's interpretation and significance. In other words, how a message is delivered (the medium) is as important, if not more so, than the actual content of the message itself. He argued that each medium has its own set of characteristics that affect how the message is perceived and influences society.

2. "Global Village": This theory posits that electronic communication technology, especially when considering things like the Internet, has essentially shrunk the world into a village. This process makes information readily accessible and results in a world where geographical distance is less relevant. The theory focuses on the effects of media and technology on society's consciousness and social organization.

3. "Hot and Cold Media": McLuhan also differentiated between what he termed "hot" and "cold" media. "Hot" media are those that extend a single sense in high definition. High definition implies a high amount of data being transmitted. Examples of hot media include movies, radio, and print because they require less active participation from the audience. On the other hand, "cold" media are low in definition and require active participation from the audience. Television and cartoons are examples of cold media, as they provide less information and require the audience to fill in the gaps.

4. "Tetrad of Media Effects": In collaboration with his son Eric McLuhan, he developed the "tetrad of media effects". This provides a structured way to analyze the effects of any technology or medium on society by asking four questions. These questions are: What does the medium enhance or amplify? What does the medium make obsolete? What does the medium retrieve from the past? What does the medium flip into when pushed to its limits?

These ideas were groundbreaking when they were introduced, and they continue to influence our understanding of media and its impact on society.

is AI considered "media"

The definition of media traditionally includes any platform or channel that is used to communicate information or messages to a wide audience. In this traditional sense, radio, television, newspapers, and the internet are all forms of media.

Artificial intelligence (AI) doesn't fit neatly into this definition, because it's not a medium in the conventional sense. Rather, it's a technology that can power and enable different forms of media. AI can be used to create, distribute, and personalize content across various media platforms, from recommendation algorithms on streaming services to chatbots on websites.

However, from a broader perspective, we can think about AI as a kind of media in the context of Marshall McLuhan's theories. If we consider "the medium is the message," AI can be seen as the medium that shapes and influences the messages we receive. It dictates what news articles we see, what social media posts appear in our feed, what music or movie recommendations we get, and so on. In this sense, the AI algorithms (the medium) significantly influence our perception of the world (the message).

Moreover, AI has the potential to form a kind of "global village" by providing personalized content to users around the world, thereby influencing global culture and perceptions. Additionally, AI can be analyzed according to McLuhan's "tetrad of media effects" to understand what it amplifies (data processing, personalization), what it makes obsolete (some manual data analysis tasks), what it retrieves (perhaps personalized experiences from traditional local community settings), and what it might flip into when pushed to its limits.

In conclusion, while AI isn't traditionally considered as media, from a theoretical perspective in the vein of McLuhan's work, it could certainly be examined as a new form of media.

what do you think AI will "flip into"

The concept of "flipping" in McLuhan's Tetrad of Media Effects refers to the idea that when a technology or medium is pushed to its extreme limits, it can lead to unexpected or unintended consequences that are often the opposite of its intended function. These flipped effects can radically transform the technology's impact on individuals and societies.

As for AI, predicting its exact flip effect is challenging given the technology's vast potential and the numerous directions it can take. However, let's speculate on a few possibilities:

1. Over-reliance on Automation: One of AI's main advantages is its ability to automate complex tasks, reducing human labor, and increasing efficiency. But if pushed to the extreme, this could flip into a situation where humans become overly reliant on AI, potentially leading to skill atrophy, loss of jobs, or a decrease in human decision-making in critical areas.

2. From Personalization to Alienation: AI enables hyper-personalization in areas like content recommendation, advertising, and news feeds. But, if taken to an extreme, this could flip into creating highly fragmented realities where people are only exposed to content that aligns with their existing beliefs and preferences, leading to echo chambers and increased polarization.

3. Loss of Privacy: AI's capacity for data analysis can provide insights for improving services, healthcare, and more. But if this is pushed to its limits, we could see an extreme invasion of privacy, with AI systems knowing more about us than we're comfortable with, leading to potential misuse of this information.

4. Decision-Making Power: AI can help make efficient decisions based on data. However, if pushed to the extreme, decision-making might become fully automated. This could lead to scenarios where AI systems make important decisions without human oversight, potentially leading to unexpected, undesirable outcomes if the AI lacks the nuance and contextual understanding of humans.

These are speculative scenarios, and the actual "flip" could be something entirely different. It's essential for society to engage in ongoing discussions about AI's role and to create regulatory frameworks that ensure its benefits are maximized while its potential adverse effects are mitigated.

Will Ai make the culture "hotter" or "cooler"

When it comes to AI, it's a complex technology that can be used in many different ways, and it can have varying effects on cultural temperature depending on the context.

1. AI could make culture "cooler": AI-powered platforms like social media sites or interactive AI applications require a significant amount of participation from users. For instance, users interact with social media feeds, share content, and participate in discussions, all of which could be influenced by AI algorithms. Similarly, AI chatbots and virtual assistants require user engagement and response. In this sense, AI can encourage a more participatory, "cool" culture.

2. AI could make culture "hotter": On the other hand, AI also powers media that is more passive in nature. For example, algorithms curating personalized content feeds on platforms like YouTube or Netflix create a more "hot" media experience, with users passively consuming the content served to them.

So, AI has the potential to both "heat up" and "cool down" culture depending on its application. It can encourage passive consumption, but it can also foster interactive environments that require high audience participation.

Does television make a "hot" culture more cool

Television, in contrast to film or radio (which McLuhan classified as "hot" media), is "cool" because it provides less detailed, less "high-definition" images and therefore requires viewers to engage more actively in the process of creating meaning from what they're seeing and hearing.

If we apply McLuhan's theory to culture, it would suggest that the presence of television might "cool" a "hot" culture by encouraging a higher degree of engagement, participation, and interaction from its audience.

What is the difference between feudalism and tribalism?

Feudalism and tribalism are two distinct socio-economic systems that have been prevalent at different stages in human history. They are characterized by different social structures, power dynamics, and economic practices.

1. Feudalism: This system was prevalent in medieval Europe, from the 9th to the 15th centuries, although similar systems have appeared in other parts of the world. Feudalism was characterized by a hierarchical social structure. At the top was the monarch, who granted land (known as fiefs) to nobles (or lords) in exchange for loyalty and military service. These nobles then had serfs or peasants working on their land, who in return for protection and the right to work on the land, gave the lords a portion of their produce. In essence, feudalism was an economic system based on land ownership and a clear social hierarchy.
   Tribalism: Tribalism, on the other hand, typically refers to a social system where society is divided into small, relatively autonomous groups known as tribes. Each tribe is usually made up of families or clans that share common ancestry, culture, values, and often language. The tribes are generally led by a chief or a group of elders. Economic activities in tribal societies are often based on bartering, sharing, or reciprocal exchange, and there's usually a strong emphasis on communal living and cooperation. While social hierarchies can exist within tribes, tribal societies are typically less stratified than feudal societies.

   
   

   

   Did televison and internet re-tribalize the culture, or re-feudalize the culture?
   ChatGPT
   The impact of television and the internet on culture is a complex issue, with arguments that could be made for both re-tribalization and re-feudalization, depending on the perspective one takes.
   Re-tribalization: The term "re-tribalization" was used by Marshall McLuhan to describe the effect of electronic media, including television and the internet, on society. According to him, these technologies are creating a new type of social organization that he likened to a global village, in which humanity returns to a tribal-like unity and collective consciousness, facilitated by instantaneous, interconnected communication. This re-tribalization is seen in phenomena such as social media, where people form into online communities or "tribes" based on shared interests, beliefs, or experiences.
   Re-feudalization: The idea of re-feudalization often comes up in critiques of the internet and social media that highlight how these technologies have created a new form of hierarchy and power dynamics. Some argue that tech companies and digital platforms function like feudal lords, with users as serfs. These companies control the platforms (akin to land in feudal times) that people rely on for communication, information, commerce, and more. In exchange, users provide these companies with their personal data (akin to the crops or labor provided by serfs), which the companies use to generate profit.
   Overall, the influence of television and the internet on culture is multifaceted, encompassing aspects of both re-tribalization and re-feudalization. However, it's important to note that these comparisons to tribal and feudal societies are metaphorical and somewhat oversimplified, and the realities of digital culture are more complex. The use of these terms can depend on the particular facet of digital culture one is examining, and different scholars might emphasize different aspects based on their perspective.