h a l f b a k e r y
Yeah, I wish it made more sense too.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
This is a computer game that involves a series of
interactive and passive events, like searches,
interactive movies, text, games, tv snow, narratives
etc, that are varied in length, format, interactivity,
order, rationality etc, and that are unrelated to each
other to an algorithmicly-determined
increased degree, so that the user can undergo the
maximum sustainable level of "multitasking malaise" (as
measured by biofeedback or other output that is
calibrated from tests that are done in more controlled
multitasking environments) so that the user would be
"free" to process events that had previously only been
perceived at subconscious levels or not at all.
So the game would seem like a total overload of tasks,
so that as soon as you thought you had a handle on one
or several, another would pop up, that was unrelated,
unless it had been previously determined that this level
of unrelatedness would cause you to totally stop paying
attention, in which case the relatedness of the task
would be bumped up a notch to the point at which the
system could reasonably expect you to continue to be
engaged with it, according to the "consciousness" you
had displayed in the past.
So this is like a consciousness decoy.
Maybe consciousness is like a crowd of people in a room
so that, if you throw a bunch of money in one corner of
the room you can find all of the cool people in a
spectrum toward the opposite corner.
||This sounds just like my job.
||...sounds like the inside of my head
||I am intrigued by the idea that unrelatedness can be
measured. Also I wonder which would be more
fatiguing: maximally unrelated tasks or those which
were related but slightly different. It seems like
switching entirely might be easier than adjusting
slightly and precisely.
||Can I just start twitching now and get it over with?