This is the best take I can bring to mind about how a non-siloed social space could be characterized. Essentially 'processes for convergence' gets you to some kind of post-siloization…

Hypertext frees up conversations to exist in new relationships to each other. Instead of ‘where?’ (like ‘this URL’) we can imagine a map of ‘what (is this content about)?’, and within that topic, conversations will vary by how inclusive and relevant they are. The basic equation for any particular piece of content goes ‘quantity of unique negative feedback, divided by the number of its overall views’. This is the mechanism of a listening/synthesis, ‘circuit’[13] within Xanalogical structure, responsible for sorting out[14] the topological dimension extending from the semantic map of ‘views’ - conversations, juxtaposed & networked together in an ‘argument[15] structure’.

Present leftovers*:

*the leftover drafts of what I've put behind this thought which I don't recall as being as clear as what's above. I'm typing this now because I want our writing affordances to reflect the impediments to authorship inherent in this kind of reflection - and help us cope.

The first thing to note is that this is an imaginary problem - we're already thrown in this world, not consciously clear as to how to 'we would explain ourselves to a machine or an alien', but quite joyfully equipped to live deep inside our own human generated concept. (and I express that as a monolingual person!) - all this is to say that systems that we engineer are what take on this unnecessarily localized 'desktop metaphor' center of the kind that doesn't appear in nature (or if it does, it's relative to the apprehender in the first place…

how not to silo information:

Including text from another document:

What are really Ted Nelson Trails? For me, trails are the edit decision list and not the net of links.

What makes an Information system open? Intertwingled? Should discussion threads be moderated to stick to a topic?

(is there anything available in terms of incentives alignment [which itself needs to be connected with each other's occurring of a situation… to ground in a convivial process of meeting with others in an online movement] when What if

now that that's above here, how do I resume using this 'page' without dealing with it. … "this issue is text fills up the space of meaning, without being 'digested' the way our central nervous system does? Annealing? Palimpsestually overwriting what's been here - of previous drafts of which could be linked from other's present pages, resurfacing 'my old position' that's now been 'overwritten by my new statement' - is this a mechanism for participating in explicitly voluntary norms? A background upon which we're able to scrutinize difference ? (recall that Diamond Age quote about human political attention in a state of moral relativism)

"Jumplink" behavior where one view is discontinuously replaced by a new one

Communicating the tangible sense of appreciable connection - adjacentness - that's metaphorically identical with our embodied sense of touch - and yet the proposition here is that this stable sensing of some kind of spatial structure (sidequest: semiotics of cat's cradle)

"Cramping"

{I started writing reference to - in this case - a youtube video, which I've just copied to my clipboard }

How to create structure in relation to the document I have now(why not this very one I'm typing into)? Why (btw) would I want to do that?: I'm creating a reference with X, I know exists, and that's something I will get to later (especially if I've created it as something which is among a set of similar things, as on a to-do list) collecting/documenting (making a place for a new document from within my current workspace)

What's this "turn into" contextual menu I've triggered? click the damn anchor thingy… friction point

[insert screen shot from screen recording - as the command keys make the UI overlay disappear ]

Here is where you can understand what I'm saying as I want to "separate out the keyboard input" of all the computers that I use to being its own new kind of technological/societal construct - that computing networks would be a system of communication, such that it becomes the most practical means of solidarity - such that a maximal (at least increasing) number of people voluntarily produce their own say in w"hat's going to happen in the future - this involves meaningfully addressing what are considered human coordination problems, by the name of

it's more of a signing device of a different medium - it's your own verbal memory, held in the kind of structured continuity allowable by digital storage - and with private key design schemes, it still correlates with you entropy/seed phrase/& signing device - as something that you're responsible for - meanwhile someone adds to the conversation, you could also reconstitute your identity into a format where a quorum of your friends is able to hard fork your present state of chain custody (clarify this assertion)

Workspace

Q? Compare, google wave

Q? what does Gabo mean by this (& when will the bug[?] be fixed which would allow me to embed his comment?

alt text: Gabo H Beaumont Apr 24, 05:06

You don’t need to use comments if you don’t like!

Comments and documents are the same except the semantic relationship, which also existed in Xanadu!

81v95QX8

24 April 2026, 12:06