Logic is the bread, water and light of computers and networking; logic, from ancient Greek logos is language and meaning (ie definitions) that evolve as human thought evolves (most agree that we are in a state of de-evolution: good or bad depending whom you ask). If nothing, definition is static (ie a platform is what ~the user~ stands on), but often changes "effect" in context (rather than meaning); this is no more true than "synthesis."

The text below was my immediate response last night to the previous email subject thread. I had just finished an apple syrup beverage made from a family of semi-wild apple trees that happen to grow near significant markers for the series of rebellions that eventually led the US Bill of Rights--the template for all human rights. These important places include the iron/charcoal furnace where the revolution was initially plotted, and the modest marker of the last battle of Shays Rebellion, the event that forced the constitution. Shays survived to reach Vermont and help found its namesake university with the Green Mountain Boys. So, life is ripe with meaning where I come from.

Userland is people, and people have minds. The way the minds work is very much the way the computers work, but far more advanced with such things as emotional intelligence and related empathic communication This idea that the mind gave the CPU its functionality in its context is actually a given to most because, obviously human minds created the CPUs and OSs with memory and interconnection networks. The journey back from the computer and network back to the mind was remarkable, because it can be modeled by the IP stack far better than any previous explanation. Further, the interrelation between parts of the mind uses co-processing CPUs and networks that we take for granted such that if a CPU or network isn't working, it is the first you notice of the remarkable system. Sadly, if one NEVER knew it didn't work (because it stopped working), one you might never know what that component or connection provides for normal humans. That is the scary part, because civilization finds ways to implement minds that are only partially-working in "synthetic" ways. Sometime in the last decade the "civilization process phenomena" became such that the computer stopped being humanly intelligent, especially with behaviors such as "troll-bashing." The communications network--the Internet--became really, really stupid and violent like TV. If you have read about civilization cycles, then you know that the proper next move is to "get back to basics" which means rolling everything back to the point where it made sense (as from a fully functioning mind) and is not just recent rationale (such as in a partially-functioning mind). For technology, this means "rolling" before Y2K, the point where financial corruption poisoned it with the "tech scandal." For civilization, this means looking closely at the gap between Sophocles and Socrates.

Without doubt, the single most important text on the culture of technology is "Technics and Civilization" by Lewis Mumford. Among things, one finds in it critical inquiry into "false charity," which applies to especially to every Information Society corporation (ie. GSoC). I attempted to cover some of Mumford's gaps with my critical inquiry into the "Occupy" movement of New York last Spring (by leveraging past relationships). In parallel, I designed the "empathy model," which leverages the IP stack, as I mention above, to show an important connection between technology and socio-psychology with respect to collaboration: intelligent emotional communication.