New text and old text | Digital decay

Lately I have came across a passage by Eran Kimchi ( The Internet − What Is New in the Emergency of Novelty) discussing the differences between the “old” text (books, newspapers..) and the new ones (internet texts). Here is an amateur translated passage from the book:

Unlike the real world where the text is subject to the hazards of time (pages yellow and rip, cards shred, words carved onto walls crumble with them) the passing of time does not show onto the digital text. It does not matter if the text was written now or a decade ago – its seems fresh to the reader as it is charged with new energy once it is summoned

However compelling this notion of nothing gets old on the internet I would like to propose two reservations:

First, the passage of time shows that this idea of data on the internet as being eternal is not accurate. A clear example of this is the sad story of Geocities, the once famous personal webpage for everyone site that has been shut down by its owner, yahoo!, in 2009. Who knows which of today top websites will be shut down in 10 years and what will happen to the text they contain.

My second point has to do with text that is still there. The text above suggests, each text is kept perfectly and looks fresh every time a user downloads it. However, I doubt that anyone would find sites that have been created in 96 feeling fresh when viewed today.

This is what old offline text looks like

and this is what old digital text looks like

see also this site and this site

In many ways this reminds me of how digital space is conceptualized – as a relative notion that has no substance apart from the user’s standpoint. Through this “net archaeology” we can see that the same can be said for time and the concept of decay on the internet (beyond relative traffic decay). Although the text is still as vibrant as the day it was uploaded, to our current eyes it seems decayed and maimed. Old sites seem to be frozen, detached and almost separated from the rest of the internet.  This does not only apply to the aesthetic features of the page  but also to the way the page is integrated and integrates other site into it (for instance its broken links that are the digital equivalent of pages that have been torn away). Other cues are also evident - archaic contact information (i.e the use of hotmail), the lack of flash or word tags, flashy background, link clutter and so on.

Last note – while writing this and looking at old sites I was reminded of the feeling you get when you hold an old book. If you are unconvinced by this post I suggest you try and think of digital nostalgia like XKCD’s eye-watering Geocities tribute or check out:

When integration changes direction

When the 90′s were still regarded fresh and when the internet was young, it seemed like it was just a matter of time until everything was recoded in a digital form. Newpapers were proud to upload their first online addition and we, the users, were buzzing about every new service that was suddenly made available online.

We may have been able to imagine a digital future as a concept  but I wonder how many of us imagined this situation:

Click here

Via Neatorama

Whats striking about this image more than other representations of online content in the physical world (for example 1,2 ) is that here the physical representation has became secondary..

Information flows more fluently online, at least some aspects of it (for now). I guess some mediums are slowly becoming more expensive to maintain and are slowly  being left behind..

A general perspective and purpose

The basic assumption of this process/blog is that all life is information, which exists in motion. Though this information is transmitted between objects, they themselves are information structures. In this aspect they themselves represent the exchange of information and, for that matter, the borders we construct in our mind to differ humans from on another, or a stone from the rest of reality is a product of our understanding of the world. Though we can continue this process forever, I think it is only methodical to stay with this imagined space where structures of information represent humans, objects and organizing paths of information exchange.

This imaginative model  (a social theory which is but a model for research, an always imaginative perspective of society as Lévi-Strauss suggested) allows us to alienate physical reality to the mere exchange of information between agents, bounded by laws in which this information behaves (for example the exchange of information between your hand and an object of matter, or the fact you can’t walk through walls the same way you can’t divide by zero). Through this imaginative view, there is no core difference between what we call physical reality and what we falsely call virtual reality. Both are equally real to humans – both are social spaces, mediums through  which humans interact, exchange information and affect each others cognitive thoughts and behaviors.

Through this scope of thought  I hope to look at the digital world, not as a second space (virtual reality) – the eternal other of “physical reality”, but as a sphere of social interaction, which definition and behavior is forever negotiated. Hopefully in the future I will reach more refined ideas about the social interaction that digital life promotes, and maybe makes possible.

For more about the imagination of reality as information structures see Blood music by Greg Bear.

Hello world!

I am an M.A student working towards a  thesis about the interaction between actors and infrastructure on the internet and the effects of social networks upon it. Mainly, I try to imagine the internet as a space through which social actors move and negotiate reality. Though this is not a new idea, the rise of the Cyberspace brings new themes and practices to that view of reality (some of which will be discussed on this blog).

This blog main purpose is to articulate models of social interaction mediated through the digital space. Influenced by articles I come across in my studies as well as  new developments of technology, I hope to pinpoint  social consequences of technology deployment. Expressing these ideas here, outside but attached to the academic world, will hopefully allow me more flexibility and (possibly) insight.

This blog is meant for the sole experience of articulating ideas in that direction, done in a place where criticism and suggestions are always welcomed (see comments and contact information).

This blog main purpose is to articulate and construct a general model of society in the age of the internet.

The basic assumption (meaning the imaginative view on society through which I research) of this process is that all life is information, which is exists in motion. Though this information is transmitted between objects, they themselves are information structures.  This imaginative model allows us to alienate physical reality to mere exchange of information between actors, bounded by laws in which this information behaves (for example you can’t walk through walls the same way you can’t divide by zero). Through this imaginative view, there is no core difference between what we call physical reality and what we falsely call virtual reality. Both are equally real, to humans that is – both are social spaces, that is, mediums through  which humans interact, exchange information and effect each other behaviors.

Through this scope of thought (a social theory which is but a model for research, an always imaginative perspective of society as Lévi-Strauss defined theory) I hope to find more refined ideas of the social interaction that digital life promotes, and maybe makes possible.