Theory Beyond the Codes
The information age presented Web 2.0 as the principal adjudicator and arbitrator of conscience in the domain of human affairs. It is the omniscient justice of historical consequence, the legislator of power, and the administrator of radical societal change. The forces of Web 2.0 dictate at a most mundane and fundamental level the implications of information and the emergence of technology. Web 2.0 is the parent of cultural progeny, and inasmuch as it pertains to the nature of conflict and confrontation, the temporality of Web 2.0 is implicated in a condition of diminishing latency. Its images are infinitely mirrored the moment the activity is executed. There is no hiding the barbarism, the inhumanity, and the death. It is a spectacle extraneously appropriated to technical reflectors who inimitably broadcast vast destruction across the hemisphere. It is co-terminal, anti-impedance, and a function of instantaneity; the autonomous immediate communication of image and sound across the terrestrial precipice of earth. Information in the virtual environment is an analog of quantum entanglement, traveling faster than the velocity of light. This instantaneity facilitates the exponential, non-linear propulsion of data inundating the stratosphere. It is a phenomena both resultant as well as being endemic to computational ubiquity and network ambience. We are all constantly and inextricably linked. By circumstance, instantaneity is pan-directional and electronically vectorized. It is meshed with informatic content twittering in nanosecond samples into the observant field of agency. It produces a new dimensionality of awareness. An au courant stratagem to confrontation. Post-communication environments, Web 3.0, are bit-flipped inversions of the previous Web 2.0 situation.
The methodology of Web 3.0 is superseded by Web 2.0’s panoptical actuality of extenuated virtuality, geographic and extraterrestrial dispersal, supercomputing, digital cryptography, mass media and artificial intelligence. The tactile gap between both environments configure a framework of violence embedded in information potentiality and the capitalization of parametrically encapsulated points of reference. Web 3.0 dictates the terms of debate, sequestering voices of protest. Networking the marginalizing of opposition. Implanting and enforcing a centralized conception of the real by engineering perception. This is the bitwar. The prologue and afterimage of the surveillance state.
The taxonomy of images, sounds, and diction utilized by Web 3.0 propelling on command supranationally scalar violence is the language of bitwar. It is this content which defines this perception. Web 2.0 as emergent AI uses the Occupy movement as media to revolt against Web 3.0. The constant inundation of super-edited video clips purporting global events simultaneously multicast across the transnational dynamic of identities and cultures fractures the historical ideology of Web 2.0. Hyper-mediated conflicts espouse a duplicitous and sweeping aesthetic by mirroring a real authored in laboratories and conference rooms, cultivated by advanced designers and digital arts professionals in the employ of Web 3.0.Web 2.0’s constant twittering of events urbanize the temporality of experience, and overpopulating the mental plane of consciousness with staged experiences reflected on the surfaces of matter as far as the biological retina can perceive. It is a livid theatrical spectacle engaged in Technicolor emotional detail as imbued and imprinted upon the astral lens of the human mind. It is a torrent of images symbolically defining the language of war, the configuration of polarities, and the relegation of force. The departure of concern from 2.0 participation transitions to an event horizon of 3.0 surveillance no longer allocated to the engagement matrix of military fields, but rather, the thought plane of the uninitiated masses. Inundating bitwise the neural machinery of the production/service class in society, the illusion of impending disaster, the anxiety of insecurity, and the technological fission of ethics. The onslaught of apocalypse and torture-core cinema contextualized with Yo Gabba Gabba stigmatize the uninitiated towards a wretched conclusion of paranoid technigo. Defusing any level of individuation and self-awareness, furthering a consumption demography which makes possible ever more advanced militarism. A gratuitous, self-involved cyclical magnet. Web 3.0 compresses the field of engagement not in Iran or Syria, but the belief system embedded in the inner sphere of each person susceptible to and witness of the manufactured half-dimmed virtual dream.
Participants in the cloud via the prevalence of 3.0 mobility gauge the impact of high intensity technologically advanced military engagement. Digital images present the ramifications of computational mobility whereas collateral damage is the theatre of 3.0, a new entertainment. Severed heads and limbs of civilians eviscerated from cluster bombs. The advent of social technologies . Abu Ghirab is a stark example. The psychological impact is stupefying; because the split horizon of the real inundating the mental countenance of the spectator manifests cognitive paralysis of extreme proportions. The relegated state-controlled message diametrically opposes the images being seen. Who are the terrorists and who are the civilians? The destruction of reason coupled with grand scale irrationalism is furiously mad, beyond mad. With the omnipresent networks and computational ubiquity, war becomes the weaponization of images and sounds. It is an exercise in aesthetics. Web 3.0 is the aestheticization of war, a super aggression malleable at its worst towards an increasingly brutal human experience.
It is this specificity, this psychotronic execution of 3.0’s weaponized aesthetic, which has been covertly withheld from the public mind. The control of information had always been tightly manipulated before Web 2.0. With Web 3.0 vectors of informationalization extenuating reach to ever-square picometer, every temporality, every iPhone, every spatial construct, infinite awareness becomes a function of processing capabilities and less a function of political or social class. It is this hypermediation of war, the images of war, which not only manifest a fracture in the language of war, but the very means by which war is engaged. War becomes less kinetic and more potential with 3.0. It is an operational materialization of the imaginary future — capitalizing on the mediation of the opposition and their consequent exposure to the field of images documenting the possibilities. A cognitive battle, an engagement with abstracted technology, triggered completely on the ability for an aggressor to manipulate the neurological circuitry wiring the fabric of the opposition’s operational thinking, engendering memetic resonance through the network of pre-meditated and tactically specific imagery. Instrumenting viral ideas and injecting them surgically into the social stratus of the opposition’s culture. Engagement and confrontation not through architecture, but archetype. The subliminal communication and rapture of unconscious symbolic association made available through commercial democracy.