we have to argue with tech investors over whether or not a computer program that imitates writing can interpret and create meaning.
2003 me: ok so back to the phone thing, you can use the internet on your wireless phone? that sounds fun
2023 me: it is not
@zalasur @drewtoothpaste You misunderstand me. The author is part of the audience, consuming their own writing. But without a mind for narrative to shape, so to speak, the tree has fallen in the forest with nobody around.
So, a machine with no internal agency detracts from meaning by having no ability to understand its own output, but might still be redeemed if their algorithmic blather creates resonance in some other sentient entity.
@randywaterhouse @drewtoothpaste I understand where you're trying to go, but I'm my mind "author" and "audience" s are two distinct and mutually exclusive concepts. In that context the audience does not create meaning but rather interprets it. The author creates the work and by extension any meaning behind it.
If a member of an audience creates new meaning from a work, them that's an extension of that work that they themselves are the author of.
@drewtoothpaste I am so pleased to deliver you some good news that will instantly make your experience of your mobile computer significantly better, at least 20% more like the magical future that 2003-you imagined:
You don’t *have* to argue with them
drewtoothpaste.bsky.social
Andy Waschick
Zalasur 🐸🇺🇦
Glyph
Libby Cone