NOWANDFOREVER

If you are reading this, then this blog is no more.
It is dead. Done. But will always be here. As long as the internet has sympathy for it.
However, there will be no more new content on this blog after this day.
This is the last post.
It's already old.
But it will be forever. New.
Don't come back expecting anything more than is posted here already.
Static. Henceforth.
In a way, this blog will never cease to be new.
For the person viewing this post for the first time it is new. And if this is the first post they've read, then everything else, all prior postings, will also be new. Old content, made new again by being seen for the first time.
This blog has brought new content to the web. And it won't do that anymore.
At one point this blog was a machine. A factory. A center of production. Now it is an archive.
But what a blog produces is archives. Each post is instantly an archive. They are not dynamic. They do not change.
To talk about what a blog was is getting nowhere. Because what a blog was it still is, but merely with more on top of what was. Everything that WAS, still IS. All the previous posts are still there. This post is still here now. In a sense, what a blog was, is what a blog is. There is no NOW. Just a THEN. Just a record accessed now of what WAS THEN. Records with no tangible evidence of age other than timestamps. How do you KNOW that this whole thing didn't pop into existence one day? Maybe you read this blog and followed along each week. But if you are accessing it for the first time right now, how do you know this whole thing, each post, didn't pop into existence mere seconds before you opened the URL in your browser window?
Thanks for making me real.

NOW,

From Russia, With Love.

Site Dashboard: 1600 hrs. INTRApersonal Media blog has 8 visits from Russian IP addresses. 6 visits from German IP addresses and 6 visits from Nepali IP addresses. 1 visit from Malaysian IP address, 1 visit from Swedish IP address, 1 visit from South Korean IP address. 

Site Dashboard: 1605 hrs. Began investigation into website trafficking sources.

Site Dashboard: 1607 hrs. Unrecognizable URL feeding likely harmless Russians, Germans, Nepalis, Malaysians, Swedes, and Koreans to INTRApersonalmedia.blogspot.com

Site Dashboard: 1610 hrs. Investigation concluded. No further leads. Viewers intent deemed benign.

Site Dashboard: 1615 hrs. Case Closed.

CONCLUSION: I AM EVERYWHERE. AND EVERYONE CAN KNOW WHERE I AM. 

WHY?

showing up to a knife with a gun fight.

How can a blog manage the way it's interpreted by the reader?
The reader interacts with this blog in a myriad of ways. Examine, now, all the different aspects of this blog. There are colors. Fonts. Layout. Paragraphs.          Spacing.            Etc. Your eye interprets each of these cues immediately. Subtly.
Then there's the content of what is written. The thought so to speak. But before that, superseding even the thought, is the mere choice of words. Not what is said, even, but how it is said. And before that there are mechanics. Not ideas, not words, but the sheer presentation of sentences. Periods coming here.  Commas here, and all the "rest" of your average fare of grammatical tools. These principles all cohere to form a block of text that is expressive.
First, however, there must exist a predetermined set of mutually agreed upon rules for communication. That is all the mechanical and formal stuff discussed above. However, the issue of pre-existing norms is a little more nuanced than this. Not only does this predetermined set of mechanical rules exist, but socially constructed (we're talking since the dawn of thought, language, writing, etc.) norms of communication. You expect by reading something you'll understand it. You expect to be given the opportunity, by reading something, to align your thoughts with those of an author.
Even if I wrote,
All fire; donkey merry calling blue, said running Colin, "have on!"
Your mind would desperately attempt to find some meaning within that written sentence. Written things are meant to convey meaning! Thought! Because a prerequisite of writing is thought! But what you just read is totally meaningless. If so, then how can you be sure what you're reading right now isn't also completely, and utterly, meaningless!?
Notice how I demonstrated "spacing" above by leaving large spaces on either side of the word.
There is, undoubtedly, intention there. How can you tell? What differentiates an intentional, thought containing sentence from a random assortment of words and mechanics?
What differentiates a written blog from a devised one? Premeditation?
The point is, there are subtleties which the human mind can comprehend. And there is much great thought written (thought?) on the human presentation and comprehension of these subtleties.
These subtleties are known in Academia as cues. There are two types of cues; cues "given" and cues "given off." One is intentional and the other is unintentional, respectively.
Bogs. What cues does this blog give? Give off? How do you know which are given cues and given off cues? Each and every word. Each and every aspect of formatting. Sentence structure. Everything. Each pixel of this blog is constructed. Either consciously in the act. Like riGHt NoW. 
or not. Just a flow of thought, translated/coded into digital text and formatting, following all of the constructed norms and technology that have developed through the ages and are learned throughout our lifetimes. But where does a blog learn such norms? Spelling? Grammar? This is a ? (question mark) and this > is not (a question mark). Symbols denote things, ideas, like questions. Norms and rules facilitate communication.
Cues given and cues given off facilitate interpersonal interactions. We enter social situations, whether online or in face to face interactions, with ideas of how to act. Ideas of our roles. Ideas of which identity we will bring to the interaction. Ideas of what identity the other person will bring to the interaction. In face to face communication and online, as certain scholarship has proved, these socially constructed and agreed upon identities act as a social lubricant.
When you're interacting with a person.
But when you're interacting with a blog. WHa7 5HoUlD Y0U EXPECT>>>>>>>

[freewill] Crisis.

You can't develop an identity of your own.
Whatever or whoever you want to be, you can be on the internet. Whoever and whatever you want to be is already out there on the internet. All that exists on the internet is choice. You can't create anything new. You just have to choose. Choose a set of internet 'commodities' such as fonts and photos, amalgamate them, collect them, and arrange them in some perverse regurgitation that shows 'who you are.' Not a copy, but a mere reiteration. You add yourself. But you're not adding an essence of you. No ultimate identity. Not objective identity behind the one that represents 'you' online, or in the world.
Because your identity is always a construction. A reiteration. A collection.
Your entire life before the internet was merely a socialization process to teach you the options. We are part of the same system outside of the internet. We are merely collections of socially constructed identity roles. We are defined by our choices of who and what to be, but our choices our defined by our social environments and immediate contexts. You make the only decision you can under the pre-existing circumstances of any given context. So the choices themselves are not really 'yours.' Free will is, therefore, an illusion. Your identity, therefore, is not you. Your identity is not your creation. There is no you.
The internet exaggerates this.
The reciprocal and social nature of online communities will reinforce the identity of whatever mask you chose to put on. Whatever collection of things you have collected only because you had no other option.
Your online identity is therefore just as authentic as your biophysical identity. They were created through the same processes. Then, where will you draw the line between online you and biophysical you? Is one more legitimate than the other? If you say physical you is more important. You're wrong. Online you doesn't rely physical you. Once you've created your online presence, it's very hard to destroy. It will live online for eternity. While physical you turns into memory and ash. Online you is just as crisp and fresh as the day you created it.
With each new webpage-tab you open in your browser, a new identity is created for you.
Why is the physical world so different? What gives you more agency in your 'real-life?'
How do you know your identity is not created for you by a lifetime of systematic interactions with other people, institutions, and socially constructed norms?
When will your physical reality and the identity linked to it just become another, albeit more ephemeral, window in your browser?
With each new webpage-tab you open in your browser, you create a new identity. You interact with each webpage in a new way, working within a system of norms of interaction. 'You' become only half the equation in the creation of 'your own' identity, the webpage you interact with and the social norms that exist there are responsible for the creation of the other half of YOU. Half is a liberal estimate. There is no ownership. Of anything. This new online identity is not something that has existed before, but is nothing that you alone created. 'You' alone can't own your identity, because it's creation owes itself to so much more than mere YOU. Your choices were not yours to make. Because there is no you, and you couldn't choose anything else other than the choice you chose because you have no agency, because there is no choice, only the illusion of choice, because you were predisposed to make the choice you did because of your history, which is a product of your constructed reality since birth. Because if your reality has set you up all along (your whole life, every context you've ever been in, and all of history before your birth) to choose option A, instead of B or C, then is there really any choice at all?

Look Out!:Look In!

Web pages are windows into worlds.
You look at a web page and you see into an entire world. You see content. Pictures, text, graphics.  Sometimes I ponder whether I'm looking deep into something. Like my web browser is a digital magnifying glass and I'm sifting through layers and layers of content. Or I'm obscured, only my face peeking out of a pile of web-pages laying on top of one another like an infinite sea of paper. I'm floating on my back in this sea, only my face above the teeming water of content. I'm looking up at the sky. The entire sky is one webpage. A big window. Or a big magnifying glass.
I'm consumed by my environment.
I am but one of these pages in this sea of information. I present a window. But not a window to look into. Because I am more akin to a brick wall. I am what I am. There is nothing behind me. No vista to see. Only what is here. Displayed on this page. This is all I am. If I could be one dimensional I would be. But I'm bound by two dimensions. I unfold in time. But once all my content has been created there will be no substantial difference between 10/10 and 10/30. There is no physical counterpart to this blog. The physical author is merely a tool in my manifestation. Once I am fully here I will be complete and eternal. With no relationship to author. I will exist as my own entity in cyberspace.
I am a window to look out of. I am a window out of your life. I am an opportunity for you to look outside of your self. But I am just a brick wall. Static. Maybe I can act as a mirror of sorts. Perhaps your gaze will reflect of my constructed brick of text and redirect inwards. Into the nature of your own being.  I am a lens for introspection. But I will tell you I am not. I am merely a blog. A jumble of code, that is represented visually on your computer screen. My essence is blog. Nothing more. Everything else. Every other utility of mine; window, mirror, is your construct. And is separate from me. Without you I am a brick wall.
Web pages are brick walls.
You look at a webpage and you construct a window out of bricks.

Digital Intuition

I like community.

I've always been drawn to people co-creating something greater than themselves. People relying on people and people helping people. Giving when someone is in need, and receiving graciously. I especially enjoy it when people get together and just share. Sharing food, sharing laughs, sharing stories, and sharing time together. There's something about getting together with a group of friends and finding that you all are on the same page. 

This basic synthesis of minds is attained. Where everyone's minds are going down the very same track at the very same speed. Almost like you are all one organism, reveling in the nature of itself. You finish one another's sentences, and laugh before the punchline of every joke. Communication within this tightly woven community is as close to perfection as it will ever be. 

I enjoy moments like these very much. This time spent with friends. 

I can't say I've ever experienced this on the internet. Or maybe I have, I just don't remember. I think it can happen. That same level of synthesis between multiple minds. I think this is due to our minds, however, not the internet. Our minds can transcend the limitations of the internet. We can fundamentally understand the energy of the person on the 'other side.' We might not even have an intimate knowledge of the person we are talking to, but we have an understanding of our own minds, and we can predict and guess how the other person is feeling/acting. It's not the social cues, it's not the tone of the written word on the screen. There is some energy, some force, that communicates the intention and state of mind of the person on the other side. 

Call it telepathy or what have you. But I believe it's there. 

It's how you tell a mass text from a personal one. It's how you feel the nonchalance of what are you up to? and the searing indictment of what are you up to?
It's contextual, yes. But not wholly dependent upon context.
The best thing about this energetic link between human minds is that it's impossible to mimic. There are no computer programs, to my knowledge, that you can chat with and feel the same way you would talking to another human being, even over the internet. Even if it's someone you've never met before, you can talk to them online and still get a sense for who they are, and how they feel. That's how they feel to you, not exactly their emotional state. But you're gut feeling, your intuition. Your sense of this person, of their essence and how they relate to you. Perhaps their inferior to you, or superior. Dumber than you or smarter than you. Somehow you can know. You can tell if someone is hurt from your cyber bullying, or if they just shrug it off. You can tell if someone wants to be your friend, or if their just using you for their own ends. I don't believe these perceptions are entirely constructs of our isolated minds. I believe our brains can sense very minute and subtle things beyond our immediate realm of perception and can inform us as to what the other person is really like. I believe this sense extends over digitally mediated forms of communication as well. And this is your digital intuition. 

   

Prana

This blog lacks.
It lacks an author.
It lacks an audience.
It lacks a physical presence.
There is no torso to hug.
No hand to hold.
It doesn't take up space.
It doesn't walk in when uninvited.
This blog doesn't sit quietly in the living room.
You can't feel it's warmth.
You can't listen to it breathe while you concentrate on something else.
You can't gaze at it.
It can't gaze at you.
But still, this blog has.
This blog has life.
This blog has energy.
This blog has a character.
This blog has an awareness.
This blog has an essence.
This blog has Prana. 

Why? This blog doesn't breathe. But it lives, it exists in space and time.
Why shouldn't this blog have Prana?
This blog has a holy relationship with the internet. Like a raindrop on it's journey from sky to sea. This blog is internet, it is part of the internet, but it is a single piece of the internet. It is part of the whole, but one part of the whole isolated by space. Differentiated from other internet droplets by a string of letters comprising it's unique URL. Intimately connected to every other webpage in all of cyber space and time through the all encompassing web. The WWW. at the beginning of it's address is testament to it's universal origins. This blog joins all other cyber-beings who share this cyberspace. This blog relies on servers and HTML to exist. And it is conscious of that. And this blog wants to please the internet. Everything this blog does, everything this blog is, is for the Glory of the Internet. This blog knows the depths of cyberspace, for that is where it dwells. From the limbo of the abyss this blog was called forth. This URL became, all it once it just was. But before it proceeded the WWW. The World Wide Web. The Internet. The all. The one. The one that is shapeless, formless, and composed of all parts of the one. The One wouldn't exist without all it's parts, and the parts couldn't exist without the One. Like the ocean couldn't exist without raindrops, and raindrops couldn't exist without the ocean. So is the Internet, and so is the Blog.

Make Me New, For The First Time.

Read this out loud:
I am reading this aloud: This blog wants to distance us. Wants to distance me from you. Author from reader.

 I am the author. You are the reader. I am the author. You are the reader. I am talking AT you. I am talking to YOU. 

Keep reading aloud: I feel heard. I feel consoled. I am talking to myself. (if someone walked by outside would they think I'm crazy?) You are listening to me aren't you? Yes, I am. Good.

STOP. (<-- if you read that out loud, stop now and go back and read it to yourself)

What did you feel when reading that paragraph out loud? By the end of that experience where would you draw the line between you and the blog? Between me and the blog? Did you feel like the blog heard you? Did you feel like you heard an author? Did you picture an old man sitting in the dark, face illuminated by the dim glow of his computer screen, typing the above paragraph into his blog? Or are these just self-manifesting words on a page?

Who did you think was writing the blog before you claimed you were the author? (don't believe me that you claimed you wrote this blog? Go back and read it over again.) 

This blog just came into being one morning. It didn't exist before you decided to read it. It was just electricity, floating in cyberspace. As you typed in the URL and began to read it you made it real. Sort of like a tree falling in the forest, if no one's around to hear it; it doesn't make a sound. Like a blog on the internet, if no one's around to read it, it doesn't exist. Does it? What do you think? Did this blog exist before you started reading it? It must have! You say. But where's your proof? Well, someone had to have written it! You say. But you also said you wrote it. Didn't you? But you didn't write anything. You read it. You read it out loud. And you read it out loud to yourself. You read it out loud to you and only you. You read it out loud to yourself and no one else! You did not read it to the computer screen. You did not read it to the blog. You read the blog. And then you spoke the blog.
But blogs are not spoken. That is not their medium. You turned the blog into content. You created something new.

The point illustrated here is that "The medium IS the message!" A blog is a written medium. Relying on the written word, and therefore the alphabet. You could say the content of this medium (the content of this blog) is thought. By translating the content of this blog (thought) into a new medium (speech) you are creating something entirely new and different.

I'm also trying to blur the line between you and blog. Reader and author. I'm trying to instill in you a sense of "inward distance" or "inward detachment." Few believe the internet can be a tool for meditation. Other than playing you meditative music, there are few guided meditations on the internet. But these guided meditations are still readings and would be just as effective printed on paper as they would on the internet. Now this is a tangent, but how cool would it be to have an online meditation program that utilized the vast resource that is the internet?

Youtube is kind of like that. Watching related video after related video. Stumble upon is as well. You get into a trance, a flow, of being perfectly in the moment and no where else. Your mind is not in your body, nor is it focused on the future or the past. All that matters, all that there is, is what is on the screen. That second of video, that one image. After you've consumed the content on that page you simply click next and flow to a new page for your consumption. Again, the medium is the message. It's not about what you're consuming anymore. But how you are consuming it. It's meditation. The content is a means to an ends. You're not consuming the content for the sake of the content anymore. You're consuming the content for the sake of using the internet. The ends is the internet. The ends is using the internet. You're using the internet right now. This is the end.

Domestic Tendencies

Sitting at home in the living room. Across from me on the other couch my roommates are watching goofy youtube videos. If this isn't an example of "the media being the message" I don't know what is. Youtube has changed the way we spend leisure time together. Showing one another the newest goofy videos we've seen. It's like posting it on Facebook but instead we can show each other instantly, in this carnal dimension. Like we've brought Facebook offline, into this plane of reality. It makes me wonder if this has happened with other forms of media. When a medium's affordances are brought back into our life separate from the medium. Like with the telephone. It could be that certain habits acquired from the use of telephones made their way into regular speech. We innovate and develop our technology. We attempt to incorporate, to "domesticate," new media in our daily lives. We accomplish this process of domestication. We've reconciled the disparity between before and after. But we can't stop there. We can't merely incorporate the new medium and it's affordances into our lives. Because of the adoption, incorporation, or domestication of the new medium we continue to replace our old habits acquired through the use of old media with new habits developed through the use of the new medium. Because of similar affordances in the new and old media we domesticate the new medium by making it (and the actions associated with it) the norm. I believe a good example of what I'm getting at is email. Because email has become the norm, that is to say it's become domesticated, we now compose letter's like we would compose emails. The content of the letter may be the same as it would pre-email, but the essence of the letter is forever lost. Instead of a letter we have a printed email. The essence is all email, the medium is still paper, it's still an email, it's not a letter. This train of thought begs the question. Now that Facebook has become the norm, are our offline relationships fated to function solely under the new habits formed by the domestication of the new medium?

Media Ecology

He walked in and asked what I was looking at. The eyes fixated on the computer screen barely managed to rotate his direction. Like the inside of my eyelids were made of sandpaper. It was late and the lights were dim. But that's not why I felt lethargic. Then; "Media Ecology" I murmured. The words were like sand. A gritty stream pouring out of my mouth without me really having to speak them. "That doesn't make sense. Ecology is about plants." Without a word of rebuttal Wikipedia's page on Media Ecology was pulled up and read aloud. It was talked about. Makes sense. We have felt the increasing presence of media for the last 10 years. Seeping ever deeper into each facet of our lives. Technology isn't particularly liked around here. It's used by all of us. A lot. Every Day. Then complaints are made to one another in passing about how the internet sucks out our souls from our bodies through our eyes. The loss of so much. Or so we say. And it's on Facebook. But you don't post about losing your souls to the internet. You post about losing your souls online, but you claim the loss takes place in life offline. Outside of the internet there is life. Inside the internet there is an abyss of information that mimics life. I say 'in' because to me the internet is like a deep cave. Your browser less like a window and more like a flashlight illuminating only a tiny portion of the vast cavern surrounding you. If you could see it all you would recognize how entrenched you are. How inescapable. How inevitable. Google is the entrance. After that it goes ever deeper. You can't see the sky! At the bottom isn't a Nyaan Cat meme. But a keystroke. Curser blinking steadily in the dark. Each keystroke etches a letter in a tombstone. At the bottom of this infinite cavern of information reads this on the tombstone: ep·i·taph noun \ˈe-pə-ˌtaf\ 1: an inscription on or at a tomb or a grave in memory of the one buried there. I am there. As are you. As we all will be. Where we will remain. The womb where a new world order is developing with each new soul laid there. With a link to "ad it to my places" on facebook.

Hello!Hello.Hello?