On Expertise, SEO, and Ethics.

When does one, either through subjective interpretation, or word of mouth, consider the cultural ethics of what one does for a living. Where we find ourselves culturally universal, with all the illusions of independence and individuality, and yet resort to atrocities to increase bank profits so we can indeed live within a higher plane of projected existence. This concern is not without merit, after-all, it is not so difficult to find one’s self in the company of such ignorance in our every day’s dealings. Where web design companies offer services relating, if not directly related, to search engine optimisation, but have almost no understanding of the environment to meet any expectations, and with this, we recoil in fear when the services they may indeed offer, advertise themselves as ‘the’ field experts. Could it be possible that this is truly the way of the future? Why is this practice acceptable?

Consider this… we live in a world where advocates and experts of web standards build their online identities around HTML code that does not validate, nor does it meet any real standard of accessibility, so one must ask why, or more substantially, how do these people continue to exist? And yes, they continue to thrive, and they continue to write and speak ‘expert’ testimonies at programmer conferences in every corner of the world, all through bourgeois family ties, leaking confidence from all available orifices, and somehow the bystanders watch and accept everything they are told. If web development had its own American Idol, these are the people we would first laugh at, and then later wish death upon, if only for the sake of quality control and justice.

We live in a time, where the potential for exceptional talent and modesty are losing their prestige to celebrity hairstyles and ironic slogans screen-printed with authentic aerosol paints. A solution would be simple, but would mostly be considered unethical by the masses, but this social malady must be stopped, and if not for the sake of culture, then for the sake of creative expression and stability.

posted on the 21st of February, 2008 in seo | 1 Comment

On Mediocrity.

Our basic logic, fundamental to promulgate original ideas, assumes a degree of simplicity that becomes the way of life for many. The realisation that later, once the novelty that may have worn its welcome becomes apparent, the ‘many’ become a relation to their work, only as far as the problem continues to exist. At no point does the passion become the journey, what many consider a phase of remote distraction, do we inevitably find ourselves falling deeper into mediocrity. As the majority becomes less capable to deal with complex interpretations and ideas, the whole of the society becomes a sufferance towards the conceptual commercial revolution, with community not becoming its only causality, but also the communal intuition of which a subject can find great benefit/truth. This Bernaysesque condition becomes ever more common in struggles of commonality, that within fractions of a degree, we continue towards a consumer frenzy that contains the resources we singularly find most comforting. How does this affect the every day?

So let’s consider a computer programmer who prefers the aesthetic, but has no cognitive understanding, nor the solid foundation required to truly appreciate beauty. If we then assume the armchair critics of the creative spirit live within those without understanding, we fall into a trap. The old saying descends deeply within the interpretive psych of the spirit, that ‘those born to create contain logic inherent in all creative spirits’, but where does this leave the mundane spirit whose sole purpose is to create logic, without a means towards the understanding of beauty. We can only find that mediocrity continues to fuel itself, growing at a caustic rate, regardless of the environment or social setting. In many ways, this becomes the ‘Fall of Man’, in that without such ability to appreciate the abstract, man becomes destined to command control without proper grounding in the essentials of life. This is most evident in business, but never so much as discussed out in the dialectic method aimed at finding truth, or better yet, purpose.

Then consider a painter, whose ‘only’ purpose is to create beauty. Within the pre-existing aesthetic surrounds that serve no particular function other than to offer a possibility (or probability) of mid-business deal banter, the painter must become the environment, so that the creation itself may consume the sole purpose of aiding pre/post business discussion. The merit required to assume such a position must then dictate a dimension of quasi logical structure, if a logical outcome is to finally reveal itself to the artwork itself. So we can see how a creative spirit does in fact contain the logic required to create beauty with an understanding of not only the environment itself, but also the solution to the problem in regards to those ‘moments of awkwardness’. In this regard, those that do not have an ability to find order within the creative spirit, shall be left to consume creativity, but such a spirit lacks beauty, and is predetermined to perish for all of time itself. How then does one save themselves in such illusions of neglected unity? For the ‘creative spirit’, which often holds dearly the ability to appreciate and understand beauty, the creative forces within the soul of the journey becomes a reward granted beyond time, for as long as the particular artwork may continue to exist. A striving towards such passion is fundamental to the progression of the human spirit, without which, the mediocrity of existence may become a plague that we seem hardwired to ignore, but one that slowly eats away at the foundations, until inevitably we find ourselves plunging towards an existence not much worth living.

posted on the 13th of August, 2007 in mediocrity | 1 Comment

The Agile Work Ethic.

A solution to misinterpretation through computer languages such as Ruby or Python is based on the problem without which a solution would find itself as the sole reason for such a selection. Considering that the agile work ethic in many ways disregards itself with what would commonly be considered the protestant aesthetic, then we can assume, if only when in direct conflict with the ideal solution, that agility in one such environment would indeed become the means to the solution, if not for the baby steps required. In days gone by, an effort to distinguish the problem from a mirrored effect known as the ‘Rights to Manifestation’ has become apparent without the need for agility, but if we become concerned with the agile practice, we find ourselves locked in a fashionistic sensibility that null and voids, and then terminally distorts the end result. Nevertheless, such a divergence of practical resources becomes perceptible to a slave mentality that truly believes in such nonsense as a survival of the fittest within the social restraints of our cultural environment, where, and only when, technology itself does indeed become the focus of the solution, but without the relentless questioning required if when the problem itself becomes probable. Consider that we, as purveyors of modernistic variations in existence, feed off obtuse reasoning brought forward in academia, but almost without a proper grounding in the physical, or worse yet, structural parameters required of one in such scenarios. If agility is then considered worthless, but not less nor more than alternative work ethics, we become concerned not with the problem at large, but rather the distinct possibility that we may in fact become obsolete by our own misinterpretations of healthy work practices.

posted on the 12th of August, 2007 in agile | 0 Comments

Analogue vs Digital.

Consider the following. An analogue existence is without a structural origin, but continues to follow a path within itself, if only towards an end. A digital existence may then become a structure itself, but without an origin within an analogue realm, it cannot end, and therefore follows a recurring motion for all of existence. If so, can we not assume that the digital is in fact a superior existence. If the digital is without end, then the end cannot be without ego, nor origin, but if we follow the origin of a synthetically generated sine-wave, we find an analogue signal may in fact become superior, albeit briefly, but only if we consider its continuation to exist within the scope of its realm. A series of control patterns within a test environment may allow an analogue signal to become weakened, but the state within its own frame of consciousness becomes itself, so the frame of its sensibilities may become consciousness if so only as far as it may continue to exist. For this reason, we require clarity.

Consider that digital may exist beyond existence, but if only for its own benefit, can we not then begin to consider that analogue may itself benefit a signal without a concise existence. If we control each signal within a relational paradigm (obviously within a structural uniformity of design), our response subjects will each become inconsistent with the account of their understanding to each other. So take into account the synthetic makeup of the digital. Without a simple forum with which such a signal may interact with the other, it cannot then be without an analogue origin, as the analogue domain becomes the fork with which the digital signal shall create its reference of existence. If the digital cannot then consider its own existence without first acknowledging that of the analogue signal, then the synthetic ego becomes a path towards its understanding. But why?

Analogue is not without a flawed approach, but one can assume in which that we cannot argue against, nor towards an agreeable conclusion without the expected reaction. If then we assume the signal holds a position of indifference towards such that is the ideal environment, how can one become clear as to which existence may be of the preferable outcome. If the choice of an non-conclusive signal permeates through the life-span itself, then without an aware prevention of itself to the analogue signal, it may itself consider death as a viable option. At such an interaction, and without cause, then we must diagnose without doubt nor apology, that each becomes clear as to which path becomes the constant, if only to appease the ego of each signal.

posted on the 12th of August, 2007 in digital | 4 Comments

Understanding Life.

If life is all that is understanding, then life itself cannot be understood to be an absence within a visual construct, for without aesthetic boundaries, regardless of its awareness, the construct cannot be seen to be without absence. With this in mind, if we assume life is but without instinctual recourse required to understand, and if without such a yearning towards instinct, where does one believe that life may yield without it having itself as a path towards reason. Consider the possibility that life is, without reason, a purpose. Assuming the purpose is to reason, then life becomes the purpose. Again, if life is without reason or purpose, then life becomes the means towards the inherent tendencies required to exist. Now if life can be seen to become aware of its organic origins, as if without purpose, then following such patterns signifies life can only exist to hold in reverence the concern with which it becomes capable to signify the interpretative ability to become its own understanding. Life may then evolve without instinct, but with a clarity of reason, if only to reason with itself. This such environment instructs life, with the forgiveness of time, that life itself becomes the instruction towards its own existence. Now we discover that living has its origin in the instinctual blueprints through an organic purpose. So if in fact, life begins with purpose, we cannot safely say that life is purpose, nor that is has purpose, but merely that life becomes its own purpose. Without purpose, life is without reason, and therefore unaware of its existence. Considering life as being without reason is again a method towards understanding, but understanding is almost as if one could find itself living without thinking to breathe. So if reason is not life, but life is a purpose towards reason, then understanding life is without instinct.

posted on the 12th of August, 2007 in life | 2 Comments
  • About

  • I come here to gaze at the eternal brilliance that is my seeds of doubt. Thanks!