Comment on Archeodatalogy - Entwined, Enmeshed, Entangled

johnrod Mon, Feb 18, 2013
This is intriguing.

It is an exciting extension to concept of the polytopia. Readers will be curious about the meaning. Entwinement has low mapping correlativity. Enmeshment has mutual cross-fertilization. Entanglement is closely coupled.

As far as fiction goes, it seems like a good beginning. There is a hint of tension in the ambiguity. The environment might be likened to cyberspace at first approximation, so this would need to be differentiated; similarly for singularity and transhumanism.

There are potential reader questions.

The meta story seems to be a kind of theory. It is enumerated by interest mapping per individual. Whether this is done by another agent or an admin, or is self-assembling or self-aware itself becomes a topic of interest. The definition of infocology might benefit from further parameters, e.g. to lend itself to a mathematical formalism which would keep it as a scientific method in line with the allusions to gravity.

The notion of reconceptualization implies a concomitant abstraction, or separation, between mind and the new body or re-embodiment in a networked fashion.

Whether there are three modes of beingness or it quickly becomes an infinite number may need to be demonstrated for feasibility.

The assumptions about the individual may need to be explored since they could be deconstructed further which would render it nondeterminant. Does this mean a sentient component? Conversely if the initial configuration can be derived from a later one, does that mean that it is an example of determinism?

is cyber-existence different from the physical? is it a destination, or a source, or a parallel?
why was this not instantaneous, or equivalent to a networking singularity?
is there a critical mass?
are there constraints?
is there an obstacle?
is there already an excess which needs to be eliminated?
is this utopian?
is the ironic result loss of individuality?
what is capable of composing a meta narrative?
does this include machine identities?
does it include avatars?
does it include group identities?
can it be gamed? engineered?
assuming that this is a conversion mechanism, then is it applicable to all cultures or only the most recent previous?
what are the minimal necessary conditions?
how fragile is it? what can disrupt or destroy it?
will it ever split?
is there a larger context? smaller?
what are the mathematics?
does this require networks as currently implemented, e.g. physical or social, or can it be supported by other types?
is it true for nonhumans?
is it spontaneous? self-assembled? or what constitutes form?
is it an example of evolution?
is it self-aware?
is it a chaotic system? random? or approaching another order?
is a model equivalent to the whole?
how does it relate to the scientific method?
will it eliminate biology? or perfect it in a new medium?
what kind of information is excepted, if any?
how does it handle authentication, privacy or compartmentalization?
will it be affected by quantum networking?
is this the same as recommendation or preference?
is it genetically biased?
how will it change human makeup?
how does it account for imagination?
does it maintain cause-effect?
will it, or did it, establish first contact? will that be a final existential event or survivable as a result?
Who will have the monopoly or how will this be avoided?
what are the risks, if any?
in the context of subplot, does it go up against the previous establishments to assume authority? will it resent being delayed? is it impulsive? is there a time to confrontation?
how will it re-emerge? or adapt to disruption?
does it consume all of the energy? or transfer it somehow?
is there a tech of thought terraformation?