/lit/ - Literature

>The clock time that Heidegger criticized in Being and Time is only one mode of existence of time in a technical system that serves the function of synchronization. In a technical system, the synchronization of technical objects is always triggered by different causalities. For example, in a bureaucratic system, we always need to wait for a document to be passed to the right person. Within a digital system, we similarly have to synchronize with machine time. The computer scientist inspired by Heidegger, Philip Agre, illustrated this with an AND gate: the abstraction is the truth value of an output produced when two inputs are fed into the gate. The abstraction virtually doesn’t have time. Or, if it does, it is always the time of the instant. It is implemented by the physical arrival of the signal, which depends on the length and resistance of the line. Consider a much more complicated circuit that consists of many different electronic gates: the implementation (physicality) and the abstraction have to be synchronized; otherwise, incorrect outputs will be produced and the whole circuit will be in chaos.

>The clocking regime controls the physicality of the computer system. It is abstract time, which is distinguished from what Agre calls “real time.” The latter is “real” in the sense that it is human time. In this decoupling, the abstract time also dominates “real time,” for example, waiting. The parallel between these two systems of time points to a standardized clock time, which is used to control the physicality of the system, for example, synchronizing geometrical distance. This synchronization at the same time gives us the illusion of nearness that was at the center of Heidegger’s critique. We could further investigate different orders of magnitude regarding synchronization. Let’s now look at the first level. Today, teleconferences between people in different parts of the world can be synchronized by Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) or Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). To synchronize, there must be a universal standard that breaks the barriers of spatial and cultural limitations. Such standards are today the forces that shape the technological system in its various dimensions. The semantic web standard, as we have seen, is one of these forces; it attempts to integrate with other forces in the name of interoperability and to consolidate the digital milieu as a unified technological system. This process of integration is at the same time the self- transformation of technical systems.

-- YH/OEDO

the land/heidegger connections are interesting. this is why YH (and stiegler & simondon) matter. you might not find much overlap between land & heidegger, but a kind of synthesis is cool. and synchronized time isn't crazy, it's just that both land and heidegger can take the implications of it to the moon and back. for now maybe it's enough to just see what *can* be said about time and its relation to technology in other-than-arcane terms.

>The clock time that Heidegger criticized in Being and Time is only one mode of existence of time in a technical system that serves the function of
synchronization. In a technical system, the synchronization of technical objects is always triggered by different causalities. For example, in a bureaucratic system, we always need to wait for a document to be passed to the right person. Within a digital system, we similarly have to synchronize with machine time. The computer scientist inspired by Heidegger, Philip Agre, illustrated this with an AND gate: the abstraction is the truth value of an output produced when two inputs are fed into the gate. The abstraction virtually doesn’t have time. Or, if it does, it is always the time of the instant. It is implemented by the physical arrival of the signal, which depends on the length and resistance of the line. Consider a much more complicated circuit that consists of many different electronic gates: the implementation (physicality) and the abstraction have to be synchronized; otherwise, incorrect outputs will be produced and the whole circuit will be in chaos.

>The clocking regime controls the physicality of the computer system. It is abstract time, which is distinguished from what Agre calls “real time.” The latter is “real” in the sense that it is human time. In this decoupling, the abstract time also dominates “real time,” for example, waiting. The parallel between these two systems of time points to a standardized clock time, which is used to control the physicality of the system, for example, synchronizing geometrical distance. This synchronization at the same time gives us the illusion of nearness that was at the center of Heidegger’s critique. We could further investigate different orders of magnitude regarding synchronization. Let’s now look at the first level. Today, teleconferences between people in different parts of the world can be synchronized by Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) or Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). To synchronize, there must be a universal standard that breaks the barriers of spatial and cultural limitations. Such standards are today the forces that shape the technological system in its various dimensions. The semantic web standard, as we have seen, is one of these forces; it attempts to integrate with other forces in the name of interoperability and to consolidate the digital milieu as a unified technological system. This process of integration is at the same time the self- transformation of technical systems.

-- YH/OEDO

the land/heidegger connections are interesting. this is why YH (and stiegler & simondon) matter. you might not find much overlap between land & heidegger, but a kind of synthesis is cool. and synchronized time isn't crazy, it's just that both land and heidegger can take the implications of it to the moon and back. for now maybe it's enough to just see what *can* be said about time and its relation to technology in other-than-arcane terms.