___ ___ ___ ___
/__/\ / /\ ___ /__/\ / /\
\ \:\ / /::| / /\ \ \:\ / /:/_
\__\:\ / /:/:| / /:/ \ \:\ / /:/ /\
___ / /::\ / /:/|:|__ /__/::\ _____\__\:\ / /:/ /:/_
/__/\ /:/\:\ /__/:/ |:| /\ \__\/\:\__ /__/::::::::\ /__/:/ /:/ /\
\ \:\/:/__\/ \__\/ |:|/:/ \ \:\/\ \ \:\~~\~~\/ \ \:\/:/ /:/
\ \::/ | |:/:/ \__\::/ \ \:\ ~~~ \ \::/ /:/
\ \:\ | |::/ /__/:/ \ \:\ \ \:\/:/
\ \:\ | |:/ \__\/ \ \:\ \ \::/
\__\/ |__|/ \__\/ \__\/
Hoppla Zine
Edition 1
==author: rlirl==
April 7-21, 2021
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+
|H|o|p|p|i|n|g| |B|e|y|o|n|d| |t|h|e| |S|e|r|v|e|r|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+
--
This continual essay serves as the sequential trace of Hoppla's thought, summary,
introduction, critical design, reflection, foreseeing, and smart-ass approach
towards expanded media's dominant mode (incl. internet).
Who knows whether our thoughts will sink into falsity and late realisation or
going to the moon…
Let's see how things pan out!
April 7, 2021; 03.15
--[Factorial Primordial
We have various versions of how Hoppla begins. Hoppla, for me, was created when
I sent an email to Diki discussing expanded media, and the name has already been there
for a year with an abandoned website. The stories might come differently from
Diki, Andang, or Godit, creating Hoppla with a very raw concept and
have not yet been discussed.
>>>>> “So, what is Hoppla? What it will be?”
>>>>> “Idk, we do not discuss further. We only paid for the domain first.”
>>>>> “Shit….hahaha”
We have our version, complete with its endless communication loop,
until we arrive at the question:
{how does Hoppla fuse and tailor the concepts? *Shrug*}
We honestly only e-meet a few times, discussing this and that and proceeding within the time.
The beginning is deemed necessary, but for us, it does not determine the exact final form of Hoppla
as we continue to progress, explore, and swear in the WhatsApp group.
Betcha, we are completing to each other>>>
>>>>> “Just argue whatever we want; if it leans in the wrong direction or is not worth pursuing,
we can insaf.”
What a remark!
Avoiding the “initial” or beginning could be eminently elusive if we refer to creating order as
the adaptive behaviour. All the preconditioning of self-defence has innately lived in
the human system.
The beginning nevertheless becomes no longer significant in the end since the system
itself constantly interweaves with the environments and social conditions where humans
or other kin inhabit.
It is no use wasting time answering the attainable question such as where it begins and
how to trace it; in exchange, humans and scientific methods might seek the probability of
phenomena to endure the consequence value of the beginning. We could not know, or to be exact,
nothing to be known; hence we should examine anything that materialised and manifested
in any forms…. according to our ability.
We try to fill the gap of the unknown.
Let us take EVOLUTION as a primary example. Where does it come from? Most evolution narratives are
in a liturgical and mystical form, which precedes the scientific claims.
Human evolution, told by modern science, revolves around studying the genome and its coding set
that gives a command for the organism to function and survive.
The code is human-only, capable of capturing or tracing, and is also assessed as the initial
construction of an organism. However, when a new environment emerges and confronts the organism,
the code system requires several adjustments to open the possibilities of newborn species.
That is how modern science believes that adaptation and living things come from
genetic variation, not mutation.
The mutation is considered an accident.
Furthermore, the coding set function of the genome remains unknown until today whilst
evolution continues beyond the limit of our reasoning.
Thus, if we posit that adaptation affects the condition of genomic evolution and
the co-evolution resulting in a physical change: is evolution driven by external factors or autonomous?
We may answer the question by drawing our hypothesis through the function x.
Whether x is related to set a, b, c, d and a1, b1, c1, d1; we could not find the answer
until we know the initial set of a,b,c,d and its generated phenomena.
The mysterious origin of evolution bewitches our fuzzy logic, yet what we can only grasp is
limited to the dynamic cycle of new species formation: birth-development-extinction.
Our knowledge entails the possibilities that occurred in the evolution trajectory:
how many species have similar characteristics, habitat, and psychological references.
In the meantime, the new species undergo some betterment and no longer exhibit primitive features,
yet we are never aware when, where, how, and why the new species evolve.
Their sudden presence emerges as if evolution is rotating in inertia while creating
a general equilibrium and new systemic solution in its ethereal movement.
The evolution of technology shares similar traits and logic
with evolution in general. It is adnominal to trace a single piece of evidence
since they are constructed based on collective utilitarian and cultural significance
rather than individual invention.
The anthropocentrism and social-use values have preceded the theoretical principle
and its practice; it might be because the technological impact transcends the life span,
dissolving a past character such as the Paleo or Neolithic era.
We, therefore, are unknowledgeable about who invented, created, and developed the technology
since technical evolution coincides with new system creation and advanced arrangements
of the environment.
It is also why the evolution consequences are systemic and future-oriented,
carrying progress, balance, and novelty and challenging the established existence.
The questions on the origin of evolution, in particular the causes of
materiality or causality, never reach human rationality, yet at the same time also
leaving the consequences that we still and will endlessly endure.
We should not hold our conviction firmly even if we obsess with the hype of
functionality or dilute ourselves in seeking the possibilities.
Once we sink into our conviction, we forget or even do not know that humans
are valid evidence of technical evolution: humans and the universe.
Do not let the social use-values and market consign the human to oblivion,
although ironically, it has already happened.
Until this essay is written and Hoppla is still in the preparation stage
(including seeking the grant),
we honestly do not know how to start or what Hoppla would be like.
It might perish in evolution, and if it develops
in surpassing the generation, we hope Hoppla will give and leave the traces
of a new way of understanding and doing.
Also, we try not to get fixated with a result such as start-end-mix;
but more encourage everyone
to enjoy the process…..evolve…… and being expanded.
April 10, 2021; 04.15
--[Expanded Media
[0.return: part 1/evolution]
Instead of old-new-mixed, expanded is more suitable for describing a medium whose
materiality is evolving into a milieu.
These established terms are misnomers since they refer merely to an arrangement
of matters representing and emphasising its function.
The media should have been studied in its evolution to apprehend how it modulates
into a technical object; thus, we are no longer agnostic towards
the dynamic progress and not submerged in situated conditioning.
We will decipher the topic later because now will only give you a headache zzzzzz
April 11, 2021; 01.24
--[Eating the Machines
**Machine: plural**
We despise machines because they hurt our egos.
Knowing or being aware of the human-machine relationship is not only discerning the symbiosis
between them in a hierarchical or prosthetic manner, but we should be submerged
in the evolution of interaction through synergistic awareness-function-practice
acknowledging our inferiority with humility.
Thus, the symbiosis could be comprehended and modulated differently.
######
We are already full of various disputes and misoneism of human-machine.
And it will be unjustified to discuss them if we are still lost in pessimism and grumpy thoughts.
Yes, it is normal to be preoccupied with surveillance
or critical of automation since both have occurred. But more importantly,
we should ask ourselves what makes us act that why while relaxing our discursive grip.
Our misunderstanding and ignorance of nature and the essence of machines
make the gap of human alienation from machines even wider.
We rejected machine means we reject the alien entities, realities, strange cultures;
and replace them with human-centred things.
In this case, the machine has succeeded in showing human inferiority.
The next question is how to build or establish a synergistic relationship between man-machine?
Our answer is through the awareness of the symbiotic function of the man-machine.
The analogy is simple: lines can be perceived as dots, or dots are the primary mode of making lines.
Creating either lines ______or dots.......... requires systematic and repetitive movements.
Furthermore, it is unfeasible for a line to be created single-handedly
without any iterative and continual
mediations from the system (either human or machine).
--------------------------------------------------------------
|How do we become fully conscious of the process of creation? |
| How do we mediate its formation? |
|How will each component be functioning and working? |
--------------------------------------------------------------
These questions become the primary mode towards the awareness of technical objects and
the power of human mediation. Humans are mediators and coordinators of the signifier
in machinic operation; hence there is no reason for us to be alienated by technical objects.
Like line, the machine is open to any alterations
and experimentations that are hypothetically saying can be created/invented diagonally-vertically-or
to other non-conformist forms.
The machine as a technical object, innately aware that who build the information exchange
in the system is human, and without human, the information system cannot be performed.
April 12, 2021; 03.00
--[Technical Agency
By narrowing the gap for alienation, we can introduce machines and integrate them into culture
(not limited to general culture but also everyday culture to high culture).
The attempt is still coherent to the human evolution as a technical object surrounded
by the system and big data… geometric fractals to the distribution of world phenomena…
therefore we who endure the burden and
sin of a massive system (aka universe), always technically seek a way of knowing, predicting,
and drawing a conclusion from the distributed data.
It also makes our ability appears to be rigid and more sensory-based.
The process of generating data (borrowing a boring technical term) has constructed
the universe and how we inhabit it.
However, many data our sensory world system could not perceive and reach embody the uncertainty
and noise that can ignite the structural disorder.
At the same time, uncertainty becomes a major prerequisite to the conditioning of the operating system,
which allows the system to create opportunities, possibilities, and changes for building a new ecosystem
(similar to evolution) and its non-linear distribution.
If these major operating conditions are met, then introducing and integrating technical objects
into the culture system can be feasible, given that modulation from one system
to other systems is carried out through an open operating pit.
Moreover, by eliminating sources of alienation and building synergistic symbiosis,
the integration of machines and cultures could generate a new space which allows
humans to understand their function and the machines surrounding them.
Humans will no longer see the machine as a hierarchical entity but rather
as an open playground for experimentation.
April 15, 2021; 23.00
--[[Recaptcha] [Art] [ist] [Man]
____First, the dilemma between aesthetic and functionality is quite understandable for
the initial exploration; we might be compelled to opt for one or combine both.
The functionality/utility/practicality would constrain
the individual, making them submit to the machinic conditioning, whilst the aesthetics which
embraced awry could induce a greater alienation. Nonetheless, both aesthetic and functionality,
especially in a social context, can mediate and maintain the symbiosis of technics-human-world.
What we can do is:
{synthesise both aesthetic and functional aspects so that we do not subside in just one value}
____Second, machines will not be subject to prerequisites conditioning: time, place, and history.
The significance would disseminate and create a new environment iteratively-constructively-continually.
____Third, the aesthetic that becomes effective may not lose its mediation power, but it will transform
into another form or become noise to system stability.
____Fourth, aesthetics works by taking data sensorium that is often not recognised by technical objects
and giving them to the machine for interpretation process; or the technical aesthetics
is introduced to the culture through human mediation who construct information system.
Thus, the technical aesthetic can identify itself as part
of a more extensive system assemblage. The fifth semantic error occurs
when we are trying to implement the formula of equal agency between technics-human-worlds.
The formula must be synthesised along with human aesthetic processes.
April 21, 2021; 17.00
--[Hopping Beyond the Server
Humans must surrender to the openness and uncertainty to reach the technical solutions exceeding
the temporary conditioning and forms; also allowing their intuition to be part of it.
Thus, meaningful work goes beyond the established knowledge framework,
open to play, imagine, and hop beyond the current server.