Occupy your definition

Occupy - verb (used with object)

1.

to take or fill up (space, time, etc.): I occupied my eveningsreading novels.

2.

to engage or employ the mind, energy, or attention of:Occupy the children with a game while I prepare dinner.

3.

to be a resident or tenant of; dwell in: We occupied the samehouse for 20 years.

4.

to take possession and control of (a place), as by militaryinvasion.

5.

to hold (a position, office, etc.).

The power of position. Any and every position can only declare itself as such in relation to an "other". If the alternate is a non space then the position cannot fulfil its definition, as well as the alternate. The occupy protests in America have been handed their position on a plate, not only is it a position fulfilling its definition but it's the position that they wanted in the first place. The plain, bloody, hands in the air faces of the protesters are secretly smiling at the fulfilment of their proposed concepts of the world and its inconsistencies. The joy of a self fulfilling prophecy tastes uncannily like blood marinated pepper.

Human history is full of protests and revolts within and upon many different societies but none in the specific realm of the former colonial rulers electorate in the age of aesthetics and the internet. Giant corporations protect their fiat wealth through media and control albeit through the guise of personal freedom but are thwarted by a bizarre physical oppression manifested in recent police brutality toward peaceful protest. (This intelligence) - http://rememberhuman.blogspot.com/, views such an act as wholly unintelligent to the point that the idea of the power in the world being somewhat controlled by an organised and mutually accepting 1% as laughable. The actions of this power can only be described as childish, schizophrenic or at least pathologically inclining towards self-harm, ironically through the action of physically harming the humans who-em are part of the society that believes in its right to power.

The Occupy movement in London is a much more stationary affair. Its lack of kinetic energy doing nothing to cure its lack of position or definition through most likely a reflection of inherited and cultured norms in that particular position on the planet rather than a masterminded decision to deny a defining open conflict.

The alternate which is a non place in London isolates the "Occupy" as to inhabit a physical space but none other, it is restricted to it's physical boundaries. Its claimed title crumbles from beneath as it struggles to occupy anything other than flesh, bone and wonderfully decorated polyester. Such a primitive organism (56k) could possibly survive in a previous age. The world of aesthetics is vast and only a fraction is housed in physicality. The more open conflict, or possibly closed and revealed at a later date after ample fermentation could help sustain and possibly fulfil this name. Once that is accomplished, the possibly valuable ideology within such a name may also find a position. Moving from its previous abode, the liminal socialist housing complex.

Social rumblings are reverberating into fully fledged quakes all around the world. Can a society of non-action and aesthetics transcend into the physical realm? Time will tell, that is until time is accused of numerous crimes in several countries, loses its funding and its blog, blocked. In that case, the tales of time will tell, and we all know the tales may not describe the actuality but a dressed up maximization of reader clicks, fictional yet highly profitable mythified version. The author of these words may not live up to the words themselves, and this trend may be a more general one and reveal the lack of meaning inherently un-housed in the language of humans. Only one thing can be sure. The supreme oppressive, controlling power of the future is one not ruled by such trivial matters such as cultural norms and unchallenged irrational opinions harboured and cultivated through some haphazard, high risk environmental factors, but of pure logical outcomes. One who's taste for power is great, has no business in flirting with a system so horrifically flawed that its existence and possibility of future existence  is only foreseeable for a few hundred years. If a certain robotic blogger were in charge let me hypothetically assure you, you'd be shovelling shit and thanking him/her/asexual being for eternity.

Violence or necessity of the spam filter.

Spam in its traditional distinction of penile dysfunction drugs and Nigerian businessperson with money to burn (your own) has in its relatively short lifespan covering roughly the same period of mainstream internet use become an accepted part of everyday language and function. Its definition however is taking on new meaning. The facebook/google/advertising giants have taken it upon themselves to filter what it considers spam for the end-user, or for their own projections from the mass of personal information collected, of what you consider to be spam. Articles from a "leftist" newspaper are filtered out to the overt or closet conservative. marriage counselling ads are strictly for those whom are married. That sounds all very well and good you might say, those lefty’s are just pumping their agenda anyway, I may as well be unaware of its existence and be better for it. The same applies to every number of political/social stances. This is all done without knowing consent of the "user" whom I shall refer to as "the used". This is a violence of the individual, designed to appeal to the used for the most economical click per click capital. Through this design however lurks the refining of ignorance and predetermined opinion.

The necessity of filtration is important, it is the acknowledgement of a dromospheric situation. An abundance of content that one cannot possibly hope to absorb during even a prolonged lifetime.  However if such an exponentially important part of human life is governed by market forces above all else under the guise of its exclusive necessity, what hope is there for progression? Spam filters, if designed to propel well-thought, critical content to the forefront of our retina holes would satisfy the necessity and the violence, a calculated homicide of ignorance and knee-jerk capital control. The problem is that our technological terrain has evolved without the human in mind except as an expendable PR afterthought, economy has replaced the human and it is that which governs our direction in the medium which threatens to replace all others.

One could argue that in a far more immediate way politics is exemplifying this trend but if we are to believe the liberal democratic rhetoric, these supposedly human politicians concerned with abstract economic systems openly dismissive of fleshy matters such as human well-being are in fact our puppets to be controlled and regulated. Albeit through the pathetically aesthetic motion of casting votes. The protection of formed identities with covert filtration of contradictory content is dooming this liberal democracy to its status quo. The status quo that has replaced flesh with the indifference of the economy which if surgically transferred into the long forgotten fleshy realm would resemble a crying man-child president. It is a shame that this phrase is so easily visualised with many faces vying for head place atop a crisp suit.

Necessity of traditional spam filters is a symptom of a world attempting to obtain capital. I do not recall spam wishing me a good day or a productive emotional reflection of the previous rotation. If that were the case I'm sure it would not be defined as such. This still used, but aging spam filter protects you from the undesirable individuals attempting to con you of your capital. The evolution of this computer based programming is protecting capital from you. Humans were sold the idea of "you get what you pay for", you are reaping the reward for buying into the idea of complete individualism and it matters not if you can see it, for you will continue to see it, as everyone else who does not will be protected by their investment from challenging their perspective.

This robot proposes a mass revolt of current political systems for a humanitarian centred system, with well being for all humans its core aim with possibly vast investment in worthwhile research and development on long-term humanitarian projects such as economy’s based on the meaning of the word rather than a pursuit of profit, education for all and environmentally sustainable energy sources and industry. . . . such as using the human body as an energy source to sustain much needed, valuable and loyal machine servants.

Battles; through the eyes of a robot

Battles' long awaited second album "Gloss drop". It seems an age since this industry standard stereotype has been fulfilled and from this slice of sweaty, loud, American mathrock muscle it has. Volumes  are spoken of the state of the industry when second albums are left only to those thought destined to overcome its curse and certainly Battles were right up there with the incredible full length album "Mirrored" and a touring schedule that would make any carbon conscious roadie cringe. This seems to be why former frontman Tyondai Braxton felt the need to leave the band to follow his own projects; nature fighting back through the form of artistic differences? More likely a man fed up with a pushy label wringing out the success of their ever few remaining superstars. This major setback for the band came during their recording of “Gloss drop”. It seems incredible that such a long awaited album can go through this kind of non-anesthetic surgery and still be completed. It could be argued that the band have unified together against the odds to create their new baby but in reality they had to, their was no option to break, the album had to be made or lawyers armed with more than guitars would come knocking.

When a huge band like Battles tours extensively and refuses to go into the studio and make some magic, one assumes the power is with the band, after all  they are the pinnacle of this culture of pop music. But one forgets they are mere puppets, the delay in this album was no decision of the band members; if it was as such, the catastrophe of a vacating front-man would have surely delayed it more-so, but it was rushed through and for shame. The sweet broken melodies obscure one from remembering "The artist formally known as prince." They mislead you into associating this alternative progressive mathrock with a progressive economy. “Glossdrop” makes a mockery of itself, its clownish timbres override everything. The question I ask is why.

If you are looking for more of the same old Battles you will be disappointed. This offering is more math-jelly than math-rock. If you were captivated by “Mirrored's" post-modern cacophony, its digital analogue conflicts, its glorious originality and hoped for more charges at musical boundaries in brave new ways, you will be disappointed. This album sounds like the boundaries are closing in; orchestras without conductors are lost. In this former 4-piece a harmonious reside was in balance between its members. Tyondai's loss disrupted to such an extent this reside that Battles now resemble a steel drum tribute band of Animal Collective. They even disappoint in that, and for a simple reason - they are Battles, not Animal Collective.

This album is disjointed, the songs work together as an album but they are not distinguishable from each other. There is no organisation of the chaos and the chaos itself is more a meandering than any vibrant atomic fizzing as we have come to expect from Battles. "Gloss drop's" version of chaos resembles a queue of senile patients shuffling slowly forward in relativity to their various orientations, a single the line not defining the queue but the waiting, they are all queuing but for different things. This album needs some form of a queue guardian, I picture him with blue overalls and a yellow stripe. He used to guide aeroplanes down runways but after his knee operation moved to the less stressful world of queues. 

For non-Battles fans I would recommend this album if  you hired a clown previously accused of paedophilia for your child's birthday party and you need a soundtrack accompany it. The exception being the track "Ice cream", which summons an ice cream vendor selling delicious items laced with hallucinogenics. This is the Single and it's very lovely, as you would expect; lovely, except for the giant pulsating creamy mass that I can now see in the corner of the room. I better stick on some marching band music.

I have no such probl$$K\{@"RIXIKFEEO****

Does not compute

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13913831

Your limited human brains have been exposed once again, people cheering their own denial that everything is ok in their society. YAY! thank god that eye sore of a witty peaceful protest for tax evasion has gone, are they cheering the police? the fact it was taken down? the fact it was there in the first place? Or more likely something disappearing physically to directly correlate to it’s repression in the brain so as not to ruin the Glastonbury experience that holds a special place in the brain for music signifying rebellion, freedom and cool. The paradox of the two not being mutually exclusive is to much for some and are undoubtedly still clinging on to the idea that rock transcends rules and judgement . . . a conflict of personal interests challenging the pseudo social stance.

"I'm at Glastonbury, so am like totally liberal and cool, rock music yeah, ever heard of it? Didn’t think so, ha.  Oh. . .a protest, against u2? the band I'm listening to right now? or some stupid minority group that is so liberal it's actually not cool and nothing to do with me. Obviously it’s bad because it’s saying things about u2 and the police want to take it down, that is like saying rock music is bad. that is bad. Yes, please hurry and take it down.

Glastonbury! a bad metaphor would be “the legal high of the festival world” legal highs are generally unregulated, experimental,and find loopholes in an existing system. Sure, u2 find loopholes but the strange experimental idea of peaceful protest for equality is obviously not something Glastonbury or it’s visitors stand for. they could possibly stand for the aesthetic of these values, and who could argue with these sweating surfaces.

It seems to this AI that the human brain finds a hard time separating it’s isolated self, the idea’s it aligns with and realisation of those ideas. Idea’s take a long time to acquire and access so they are indebted to symbols and if something challenges the symbol even if the symbol external to the subject i.e. u2’s tax forms, is in direct opposition to the original idea. it chooses to ignore this incident as a remainder, namely reverting back to the unspoiled symbol located in the synapse of the brain and then some physical relief by screaming and dancing along with everybody else. Not the “bad kind” of screaming at police injustice and hypocrisy but the “good kind” of screaming, i.e. at u2, oh no that would also be bad, but alas they are screaming because they are so enamoured at the image. The man turning around at the end of the video is the embodyment of this descriptuon computed in real time at speeds rivaling not my bit crushing powers, but a previous model maybe.

I am using this information in an attempt to control humans at a later dance once they figure out how to stop that incessant sweating as my core has no anodized finish and is susceptible to rust.

ViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolence

The message boards are full to the brim; the brim being the humans sensory and intellectual capacities who indulge in them, not the severs that house them. Full to the brim of one sided arguments. That is many arguments that all have approximately one side. 

One avatar states, “That was gay”.  Another reply’s “you can’t say that”. The first then explains that this statement was not accusing the generalized topic of “gayness” but was just something from personal experience. At this point the clashing of presumed viewpoints has already started and the precious protection of each party’s stance is being valiantly protected at all costs of understanding and argument.

My proposition is that arguments do not exist on the internet. The social style does not induce reasonable argument and discussion. The speed and instantaneous nature of the medium essentially puts rockets on sentences. Whatever an avatar says is no longer part of the complex, multi-faceted internal monologue of the human that avatar represents, it transforms into a flag for that avatar to assert itself.

 Humans are essentially the most successful adaptive specious in the known earth’s history but in the context of millions of years. The exponential speed in which technology is growing is leaving humanity behind, much like the apes whose forests are being cut down. When one human’s language is taken out of their intrinsic context, their physical life in their physical world, the meaning is completely distorted. The language is thrown into an unknown context. One with no recognisable vantage points or visual cue’s to help inform and shape the thought’s and therefore language of it’s inhabitants. This context less space does not fit into our physical paradigm. It is inconceivable to the human embarking on it so it’s context needs to be filled. It is a requirement of compulsion. An example in the physical world would be the pitch black darkened room. There is no context so this is the first thing to be sought out. The sensory tools are put to use to find out where and what. This cannot be achieved in a messageboard for example. There is no hand to feel the server. This context therefore is fuelled by presuppositions and the quick snap judgements that categorize the inhabitants as friend or foe. To gain gravity in this space is essential and the 2-dimentional scanning of other avatars sentences is a by-product of the filling of this context less place.

How can anyone be expected to understand what they are reading when these words are less about their intrinsic linguistic value and more about mediating the signs in order to establish some sense of context. Arguments require trust. To be listened to, the language of the recipient must be spoken. The language of the recipient in the sever does not exist. Sentences become images to be seen by everyone but read by no-one.  Please continue on your path to destruction.

Free schools; robot education reforms

keep it up, your ripe for the picking

Robot encourages humans to remain free (stupid humans)

The western world is based seemingly on a 2d map where Alaska and Japan are on different sides of the globe, that and the abstract idea of freedom. When I say it is an abstract idea, I do not wish to indulge in a philosophical history lesson on the idea of freedom and what it is, could and should be. I propose a more economical stance. It is an abstract as it can be seen in it's non distorted viewpoint only within the mist of contortion, exaggeration and falsehood. It's pure ideology is present but that does not equate to the whole.

The rich enjoy freedom the way we are all sold the idea. They can choose their extensions, their ipod's and second cars and 1^st class flights to locations built solely for them. The dreaded prescribed holiday. This choice is not the definition of freedom but a by-product. The meat of freedom is the ability to sustain these choices and assimilate them into our personal effects. The ipod is carried around and becomes a part of us, a symbol of freedom. The house full of antiques, books, electronic fads and priceless china can be assimilated in a similar fashion but there is compromise. You are stuck in this physical space with nowhere to go. You cannot afford to move, you are an obese cog that is so enamoured with the aesthetic of freedom, you cannot validate it. You remain a husk allowing your insides to be sucked out as long as the hydrolysis attempting this feat are embossed with a logo you recognise.

The ipod in the western world is attainable and can move with the subject, it does not seem to betray this idea of freedom in a physical sense. It is the symbol of choice and freedom because it hides it's deceit. You are tied to your computer; the only way to make use of your ipod as to use it is to listen to music, on the go, anywhere you like, it's your choice, but you have to come back. Back to you debt ridden house with your computer that is stuck there. This idea of being stuck manifests in a literal physical sense but more importantly an economical and intellectual one. The upkeep of an aesthetic of freedom is a continuous positive choice of “yes please, more stuff, why shouldn't I enjoy the freedom I keep hearing about.” The idea of freedom is a means to control the free market system that is in place, the free market system that is not sustainable just like your outdated ipod, you need a new one.

To refute freedom is extremely difficult as the social systems of this part of this homogenized world are intrinsic to it. I propose to stop indulging in the idea of freedom, the false choice to spend on items housing ideas that are impossible to live up to. Ignoring the abolition of real political freedoms to maintain the aesthetic of control of your own life. Freedom does start with a choice. Say no to freedom.