Notes from Post-Planetary Design class, March 29:

What design opportunities do we see in the technoscape to escape velocity narrative?
In relation to Vinge’s Rainbow’s End, Spike Jonze’s Her, Nick Land’s Meltdown, Stross’ Accelerando

Augmented reality: new sovereignties (re.: Benjamin Bratton) starting to exist with the cloud etc. – why is there different sovereignties for the AR and the physical/material world?
For example: the embassies in a foreign country, is governed by the laws of the country that the embassy is representing. It all comes back to the physical — everything comes back into the network of physical carriers (the body etc.)

Reality may not be as real as we think it is; or that the axioms may not be bounded by what we consider to be physical laws. A bit of elbow room for ontologies —

The isomorphism of one system and another (the example: turbulence observed in milk in a coffee cup and turbulence observed on the surface of Jupiter). Laminar flow.

The moment where turbulence makes place – the onset of turbulence – also happens in systems that do not look liquid at all.

Network capacity – communication networks – Is that a fundamental natural occurrence, where the internet is a part of that? Like funghi networks, mycelium etc. Does that mean that computational systems have evolved by itself in a way? Is it possible to say that natural networks and the internet network is isomorphically the same. 

What if we take the anthropocentric out of the design and say: Humans were agents who participated in an emerging platform rather than Humans designed the internet.

What does intelligence mean? What are intelligent species? If intelligence is measured across lifespans — 

But what constitutes agency?

Owning pieces of infrastructure, private infrastructure