You already know what it is press play on the media for each section, this is a multimedia format, you’re entering a zone
This is going to be format A.
1) set out the theory.
2) set out the subject
3) apply the theory to the subject
This will be good for a few reasons.
1) I can later decide to paywall the third aspect if I need money
2) I feel more productive this way, as each theory can be “checked off” in a semi-formulaic manner (this is vanity)
3) I can better format my thoughts, which makes me feel better.
4) I can stay abreast of “hip new topics” and thus assuage the wishes of The Algorithm
You might notice that there are no benefits for you, the reader, to this format. You might also realize that my best writing, i.e the little bit about the man at the bonfire, comes when there is no theory or subject. When it’s all a little murky. Unfortunately, those sorts of things are hard to Crank Out as it were. My unfortunate but extended stay in the mental asylum of Social Science Undergraduate Programs has lent my mind to these sorts of stamp, seal, and deliver “take-blogs.”
As a side note, this does not mean that all of the posts will be in this format. This just format A after all.
——————————————————————————————————————
1) Theory
Habermas
Yeah that’s right buddy we breaking out the big guns. We’re breaking out the studied-german-for-a-year-or-two-and-failed hyphens. We’re breaking out what is at the root of the 4HL/Payoff space divide. It’s an issue of lifeworlds, not just the material conditions, but the under-the-mental-floorboard-thinking that divides people.
All of the quotes are from Jurgen Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action Volume I. You’re never going to read all three volumes. If you do, DM me, I will interview you, and then I give you five bucks. How’s that.
Anyhow, the paper then goes “wow capitalism uncoupled the subject from its lifeworld and financialized its nuances” or whatever. Not the point right now. The point is that the lifeworld is the lifeworld is concrete, intersubjective, and flexible. (is only flexible when analyzed and brought to the level of fact/validity/genuine nature). So when you tell someone “yeah i think AOC is planted by the CIA” they take that information, it runs into the concrete wall of their lifeworld, they reflect on what their peers would say to that, they refuse to raise the argument to a point of fact, and they say “haha yeah and aliens are real too man.” The point is that there are two different “worlds” for Joshua Weissman and for the person who is at home Watching Joshua Weissman Content. And his burger is too big.
——————————————————————————————————————
2) subject
Joshua Weissman’s Making the Mc Donald’s Big Mac But Better Youtube Video
Weissman is making a burger for YouTube’s algorithm to optimize, the arrows and text on thumbnails is optimized as a market scheme, it has nothing to do with what you as a human want or experience in the day to day arena it isn’t real.
There are a bunch of subpoints I’m irate about here as well, like the McDouble is like a buck eighty-nine now, what the hell, small fries are $2.00 out of a bundle, are you serious, also who actually eats Big Macs this is silly. But the main thrust of the issue here is that the burger that Joshy Boshy Algorithm Boy did not make a Big Mac. A Big Mac should be iterable (for the average home cook, meaning not a bunch of money and time), fit in the hand (THAT IS WHAT A BURGER IS), and not be messy. You could so easily make thinner bun, make less gratuitous toppings, and created a weeknight burger that really truly slaps. But that would not catch the attention of the algorithm, and would not force the thousands of dopamine-starved-click-thru-fiends that power Youtube’s ad revenue to click through his video. Because content on Youtube isn’t really marketed at humans, because a “human” is too abstract a concept. The Youtuber’s lifeworld is not aimed at his subscribers, but at the algorithm. This is the chief pillar of their lifeworld, which is how you get stupid burgers like these. Stupid.
——————————————————————————————————————3) application
Every tech “platform” is a lifeworld. It has its own rules, objectives, subplots, etc. This is maybe part of what Randy is getting at in his Video Game Review article . So when you go onto Twitter, you need to remember that it is an owned space, and the rules of that lifeworld are not real. They are not rooted to the tools of your space, to lifting heavy things up and putting them down, they are not linked to you. When you go on twitter you are putting on a fancy little hat, same as Facebook, Kroger, or speak to your family. The idea is to put as much of yourself into that hat and still have people recognize you.
Anyway, Weissman. Good job to him. I’m sure he’ll get a bunch of revenue. That’s swell. I’m just angry that my world isn’t his, because I have to go to McDonald’s because I’m too tired to cook, and I’ve become what I hate.
Weissman’s world is concrete, because he lives in a world where his most important thing to think about is the content. The content matters, not the food as sustenance or the food as a unit of time that it takes to prepare in a busy work week. Just the food-as-content. Not the food-as-food.
Weissman’s world is intersubjective, because his peers are also “content farmers.” Lockdowns have likely worsened this, as he can’t go talk 2 his uncles or aunts because of the varus. Feels bad for him and us all. By the way, lockdowns are terrible policy if you want to save lives and great policy if you want to disintegrate the social web of a nation. Funny.
Weissman’s world is flexible. Maybe he’ll read this, or someone will comment something, and he’ll make a more efficient real-rooted series of videos. Power to him. If he can go through some sort of analysis, place some sort of Faith into some sort of power higher than the Material the Algorithm that guards its riches, maybe it would make better content. Then I could just make a burger in my house.
Check out based.cooking for an example of what I think is actually a concrete example of good, lifeworld rooted tech. PSA it’s old-school.
Thanks for reading to the end, hope you enjoyed it. Make sure to Like, Comment, and google Search Mark 12:17.
a) I didn't have some kind of thing I was getting at with the review, it seemed very reasonable to me and I didn't think to much about it. it just seemed like the thing to do. once I had the first thought I began writing before getting all caught up in thinking about it. something something video game journalism
b) I think this is as good a text as the grill assault because you actually transcend the content-sphere to express something genuine and vulnerable. however the grill assault is funnier to me now after I have named it "grill assault" in my head
c) I am very happy to see the 69 guys making a comeback, I always felt that bit was underappreciated