Re: [-empyre-] C. S. Peirce and Code

[fmadre@free.fr]

Selon Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@rmit.edu.au>:
> from my (blogging and hypertext) perspective this belies a
> misunderstanding about what a blog is.

oh, well, I've been blogging for as long as you Adrian...

> I write a blog. It supports trackback. You write in your blog and
> link to my post. This connection is recorded by my blog as a
> trackback. Where does my blog begin and end? Yours? I stopped writing
> 12 months ago. Trackbacks still accrue. is my blog 'ended'? If links
> are the economy here (and they are) then it seems specious to think
> that my blog is 'finished' or has an 'end'.

so, what you are saying is that as long as your blog is being linked to it is
not ending. what i'm saying is that when you stop posting to it then it has
ended. we are obviously not talking about the same thing.
would you say that for instance "war an peace" doesn't have a beginning  because
people quote from it (from somewhere in the "middle" of it) and no end because
people are still mentioning it ? I would not.

still if I accept your definition of begin/end then what you mention is not
specific to blogs, it is an inherent characteristic of the web that our online
pieces are zapped thru rather than experienced from elusive start to
hypothetical finish

> All works have a literal beginning and end. This was done to death in
> naive criticism of hypertext circa 1996.

)

> Blogs are emergent ecologies that rely on links. Links are the
> fundamental transaction. (See Weinberger, Walker, Tosca, and myself
> for stuff on this.) They are an excess (in Bataille's sense of a
> general economy) that blogs celebrate, even when business is busy
> trying to appropriate them (but as an excess this will always only be
> partial). They are porous to the network in ways that most other
> writing to the web, certainly everyday popular writing, never
> achieved.

they are only porous to the blogosphere, very closed and small circles always
retraced

Every current system of authority in blogging (as far as I
> know), relies on links in to determine authority. I cannot write
> links in. I am subject to the network for that.

it's so perversely simple to get those links in and that is the burden of "the
blog".

> This is exciting and novel. It is emergent,

it's at least 6 years old and I got bored 3 years ago.

> are those that mistake network ecologies for diary writing :-)

sure!

f.