Computer Time

Its not business time. Its computer time.

Time spent staring at the screen. Computer addicts are sometimes surrounded by multiple screens, no doubt despairingly unwrapped for a me tube video expression.

Expression. The democratization of art. The dilution of the power of it.

By littering the information highway with absolute tosh, we are constantly exposed to anyones' choice of media fodder. Not just what clever reporters in their overcoats could muster with their sharp pens and hammering keys; not even what an educated person has to say, it no longer has such sway as the grey breath of Ms, Mrs and Mr Average (listed in order of importance).

The next pink hairdye wash is going to tickle you with inanity. The next smart alec who can grab your attention. The next viral gimmick that generates instant audiences of millions has democratised fame, its advantage. Suddenly as we all become the reflections of our selves we feel our horizons are being expanded.

Nothing that a good brisk walk in the Himalayas would not fix. Especially this miasma of media chuck sized, boiled down snippets of instinct we somehow should show our democratic will by counting our viewer statistic and there you have it - in a marketable package - fame for the common man. Big brother for everyone. Our private lands have become open to the minds of strangers and our mental horizons out-pace our social or ultimately business connection in the virtual world, our senses are bombarded by instinct activating messages to give you that thrill and excitement you so crave, along with that "sticky" medium. Chat.

That other humans are the ultimate addiction is now apparent. That what we sense, a social bond, is now able to follow paths of instinctive desire has meant an extraordinary pattern of intellectual leverage is now possible. These computer games prove that there is more to social contact than our bodies pressing together in a collaboration that thrills with its inherent sin. That sensation is also sold and delivered. Another instinct served.

So why not food. Try eating an electron, or the image from your 32 inch flat screen monitor. Not that tasty. The stimulation of other senses (the scratch'n'sniff product line) online is more Matrix like than Orwellian. 1984 was well dated. My daughter was born that year. For me it is the start of the new future, and thus the death of the old. 1984 thus stands as the spiritual division of the millenium. No doubt some contorted calendar variances will be discovered to account for that difference. News fills the gaps we leave for it to fill the media with its fodder, information. It does not matter so much if it is relevant, or even reverent. It happened, so lets trust that people out there will be interested.

Most markets work upon expectation. Working against that is the task of the speculator. Second guessing everyone, they only really pay when most of the rest of us are doing extremely well, thank-you. The most conservative investors control huge rivers not just of capital as money, but more of capital as debt. The world's balance sheet could be more properly called an Imbalance sheet.

Maybe it is time to question the inherent nationalism and racism that independently traded currency enables. Maybe interest rates are in fact a good thing. Perhaps, instead of a theory about economic mathematics, we could just plan to do what we want to see happen - in a budget - rather than always cutting back to what we must afford and thus eliminating qualitative improvements while supporting a commercial imperative like "market research say make more SUVs!" when clearly, the US economy and the world could never really sustain them; but the point here is that by providing economic logic that supports doing something that is not the result of intelligent assessment but the brute force of market conditions we are selecting things like extensive unemployment, violence and war, false social morality disguised as Christianity - are these things valuable? Economists are like med-evil surgeons, with a "we will hack off your limbs until you feel better" approach to human existence. Economists have a religion that requires you to fit into the social hierachy of a tax bracket. If you did not, you would be treated like a heretic.

Social order means the protection of wealth by any means possible, and that is an economy in its own right. And so is catering for the security guards. Social independence is not an option, unless you win the lottery and then society may develop lower meaning for you. If you make a fortune in business, then it must make you feel worthy to give it all away. Going to work every day to save the lives of people who live somewhere else is morality. Killing people because "we will never see eye to eye" is simply a lie.

What convinces recruits to sign up for war? What convinces people to engage in virtual war? Are these two things at all similar?

If repeating our experiences is what enjoyment is about, then it seems a little odd that a game should in fact teach us anything. It teaches us the human value of cooperation. We do not learn it from television.

It has occurred to many that a great big computer game with political consequences would be a way to replace physical war. What is to stop a bomb going off anyway?

Human instinct. The game would be more important than anything. There is no point in death when you are ahead in points. Or have to catch up. The game would be protected and enshrined as the source of the world's common currency.