Wednesday Poem

For all of me and all of you
we made a truly mighty stew
and from our pot we drink the brew
to keep the cake and eat it too.

But no-one saw the ice caps thaw
as we burned coal to build our awe,
we knew it well but always tell
of need to quell the hardship of the poor.

Yet poor remain the huddled masses
and though they teach it in the classes
a true improvement rarely passes.

Farewell oh world of things a plenty,
I only need one hat not twenty,
and certainly no virtual ones.

And while we give up many things,
and for the better,
we need to keep those things that matter,
technology that keeps alive and healthy,
those who need it, not just the wealthy,
but everyone who wouldn’t thrive
in a hunter-gatherer life.

So really what we need to do,
is not make more,
but to make due,
we have enough, I’m sure of it,
it’s just that some are full of it,
while others really live like shit
and those between are taught to increase
rather than to find their own peace.

But seriously we (or most of us, at least) desperately need to reflect, re-evaluate and re-think our relationships with things.

Coronavirus, Climate and Capitalism

The Coronavirus has achieved in the course of a few months what the environmental and climate movement hasn’t been able to do in 80 years. We’ve largely stopped flying, cruises are cancelled, car manufacturers have stopped producing their killing machines and most importantly, both politicians and the majority of the population is actually listening to the advise of scientists and taking a serious situation seriously. We’ve also been quite violently reminded what the important things in live actually are: Food, water, shelter, health and, most apparently, interaction with other people.

All it took was an immediate risk to each individuals well being, governments taking the situation seriously, and media reporting without really considering corporate interest. Reassuringly, we are already seeing some of the media (and billionaires twitters, essentially the same thing) coming back to their senses and pointing out that saving lives is nice and all, but if we have to tank the economy to do it, maybe we should just sacrifice a couple hundred million people and be done with it.

Behind this somewhat revealing mockery of basic human decency stands another truth that Covid19 has brought to the surface: Our current economic system is fundamentally incompatible with the low-consumerism life that has temporarily been forced on us. Essential jobs are still kept working and through this we can see that most jobs, I guess, aren’t essential. But of course, many if not most people are working those jobs, me certainly included. And the simple rule of capitalism seems to be, if you don’t work, you don’t eat. But phrasing it like that is already falling into the trap of allowing capitalist ideology to define what work means. Really, I should say, if you’re not getting paid, you don’t eat. And then we can ask who decides if we get paid. A then we have to ask who is really in power. I guess we will get the answer to that based on weather people are forced to go back to work before it’s safe to do so or not. In the US, in which more than in most other countries, the billionaires are in power, the questions seems legitimately open. In Germany and most of Europe, it seems like states are mostly doing what they are supposed to do, keeping their constituents safe and bailing out the corporations who in times of crisis always rely on the state and at all other times tell it to kindly fuck off and not regulate them or take any of their profits. But at least yes, our states are trying to keep their constituents safe. So maybe our democracy isn’t quite so broken.

This would be good news, except that after the corona-crisis is over, I guess we’ll have some time to make up in producing wonderfully efficient (at killing people either very slowly or very quickly) SUVs, shopping for child-labor-produced fast-fashion to fill our already overflowing wardrobes, time to throw last years collection in the bin, and taking that vacation to the the great Barrier reef while it’s still there, presuming enough airlines have been bailed out since they spent all their profits on stock buybacks instead of saving for hard times because that would be silly if you can be bailed out by taxpayer money. And yes, all these are indirectly examples of consumer blaming and not really helpful. But I’m not trying to be helpful here. I’m just trying to point out what has never been more obvious: If all the consumer blaming actually worked, and people would vote with their wallets and no longer buy or do anything that’s not actually worth the environmental impact it causes, the whole damn system would collapse, just as it is, temporarily, doing right now, because people have to stay inside and can’t do all that consuming right now. So any politician or movement that’s claiming we can fight climate change without fundamentally changing how our economy operates is either not serious about fighting climate change and just trying to appease you, or completely out of touch with reality. In the case of movements, many of the more popular ones are also sort of mincing their words or avoiding the topic in order to not scare off all the people who are, through no fault of their own, incapable of imagining a life beyond capitalism.

Many Economists tell us we just have to price in the carbon and keep everything else the same. Maybe support poor people so they can still afford the necessities. Great, if we really did that, included all industries, and set the price such that it had an actual effect, stuff would get really expensive, we would buy less stuff, companies would go bankrupt, there’d be mass unemployment, the results would be the essentially same as just shutting down or re-purposing the factories directly. The simple truth is, we have to completely stop increasing the concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, and fast. However we get there, the end result will not be the same economy we have now except with electric cars instead of gas fueled ones and all the coal plants replaced by windmills. That perception is based on the myth that with increases in efficiency, the economy can keep growing without running out of resources. Because capitalism is so great at increasing efficiencies. This appears to have been the answer every time environmentalists have asked in the past how exactly a system dependent on perpetually growing can fit onto a fixed size planet. In the case of climate change, the myth becomes, the economy and material standard of living can stay the same while decreasing resource use because of increase in efficiency through green technology. Because the free market is so great at innovation once you price in carbon emissions it will magically find a solution.

Speaking of Consumer Blaming: I bought a book on Amazon again instead of buying it directly at the small leftist publisher. But Amazon was the only place that had a readily available e-book version and I’m kind of over physical books for practical reasons. In any case, this seemed a fitting place to purchase a book investigating leftism through the lens of the melancholy of it’s failures and it’s art. Amazon may be the most prevalent monument of capitalism of our days and thereby the failures of leftism. A quasi-monopoly, a perfectly efficient machine of consumerism that automates and dehumanizes every aspect of it’s operation. Amazon employees are being constantly monitored and made to follow predefined processes dictated to them by computers as precisely as humanly possible, with very little concessions being made for such annoying bodily needs as having to pee, needing to deal with menstrual hygiene, eating and so on. If a worker dies in a warehouse, the other workers better keep working. After all, the defective piece of the machinery will simply be replaced as soon as the human resource allocation algorithm deems it necessary. Of course, paid sick leave was out of the question wherever governments didn’t enforce it. This wondrous machine is built to a large degree by software engineers like us. It serves to full hundreds of millions of peoples materialist desires, but it’s primary goal appears to be to generatbe wealth for the richest person on the planet. Having supervised the building of this machine of alienation and consumerism, it seems fitting that Bezos, like many of his billionaire silicon valley friends, is worried about AI risk. But that is another blog post.

Allow me to go on another tangent (of course you don’t have much of a choice since I’m the author and presenter of this piece). Spending a Sunday at home, letting my brain get fried by an algorithm owned by the biggest Surveillance Capitalist out there, I recently came upon an Episode of environmentalist kids-tv show „Löwenzahn“. The main character makes a startling realization of how much trash he produces. He then goes to a supermarket and attempts to buy stuff using his own reusable containers, which is of course unsuccessful. In the end he ends up buying stuff at the good old market. While at the supermarket, he explains quite well the purpose of packaging: Since these modern stores no longer have people that recommend and sell you things, they are self service, the packaging has to sell the product for you. So the purpose of the packaging is to reduce to amount of labor needed in the store, since nobody has to weigh and calculate prices with a prepackaged product, but also it is advertisement! Remarkably, the episodes cartoon short film expands on this topic. In what is somewhat an homage to Alice in Wonderland, a little girl accompanying her mother while grocery shopping gets sucked into the world of advertisement. This is, not very subtly, called „Lying-Land“. All the characters there are just repeating hollow advertisement slogans, until Alice gets seemingly offered candy, only to learn that, of course, nothing is free and she has to pay. As she refuses, a factory shaped like the stereotypical top-hat wearing capitalist tells her that she must consume, otherwise his chimneys will stop smoking and he won’t make any profit! She refuses, he cries, she is back in the real world with her mother who promptly offers to buy her a chocolate bar, which she refuses. What a wonderful episode teaching kids about advertisement, capitalism and how they could change their consumer behavior to use less packaging. A few days before I had seen an episode from another German children’s programming educating about trash – hence the recommendation, I suppose. Good to know that there’s this kind of stuff on the TV, teaching the next generation about environmental issues. I’m sure once they grow up they’ll do something about it.

Both these shows where from the 80s. That was almost forty years ago. Nothing has fundamentally changed except that there are now zero waste stores in larger cities in which a select few can spent a bit more effort and money for a better conscience. So essentially the same thing you could always do by buying at a market except in those stores you get dried goods as well.
So when I now read opinion pieces of leftists or environmentalists or both talking about how the Coronacrisis is showing us that change is possible, I can not help but to remain pessimistic. Yes, hundreds of millions of people are now seeing that a lot of rules where fairly arbitrary to begin with. If the government wants, it can totally just give everyone money, at least for a while. All these socialist reforms the left wants are completely feasible even under conservative governments if it’s necessary to keep the majority people from dying or worse, going bankrupt and henceforth being unable to consume. If we want, we can just work remotely and don’t have to commute, saving god knows how many car trips. Even the police in Philadelphia is now only arresting people that „pose a threat to public safety“. Nice to have them acknowledge that most arrests aren’t actually for that purpose. Ah and of course, rent appears to be kind of optional as well.
But none of that stuff is sustainable. It’s not designed to be. I’m quite sure that this crisis will pass and we’ll go right back to how things where. Only with a number of people dead, a lot of people even more destitute than they where before, a lot of small businesses and lower & middle class existences ruined, and a few billionaires with a lower number that’s still so big that the change in their wealth is essentially meaningless in all practical measures (such as how many yachts or luxury houses they can afford). And of course, with bigger government deficits – which make a great argument to cut back on social programs because clearly we can’t afford them.

Ah and climate change? We’re already doing everything we can about it. We’re shutting down coal in 10 years! What more can we do.

No virus will safe us. No NGO or Social Startup. No Bernie Sanders or Greta Thurnberg. Once this is over, please join the Rebellion. Join Extinction Rebellion, it’s a good organization for people new to activism. Join Ende Gelände. Support your local Antifa. It’s all the same fight. Many of you are already activists, you know what to do, just keep going.
We’ll go back to the status quo after this crisis, more or less. But the status quo is going to kill us – albeit much slower than Corona. The time has come to stir things up. I don’t really expect it will happen. I’m depressed. I’m weak and I don’t manage to do much in the sense of activism. Sometimes I sit on the street anyways. I’d like to not sit there alone. I’ve had enough of being alone for a while.

Einfache Einsätze, Einfältig Eingefädelt

Das Internet zerstört dein Leben.
Wer das sagt, lebt auch Glutenfrei.
Das wird man ja wohl noch sagen dürfen.
Früher war alles besser.
Die Leute denken einfach nicht nach.
Das interessiert doch niemanden.
Das sind halt so Naturgesetze.

Die Jugend von Heute hat keinen Respekt mehr.
All Cops Are Gay.
Diese verweichlichte Feminismuskultur macht meinen Sohn noch zur Schwuchtel.
Die Linksextremen sind doch genau so schlimm.
Deutschland geht vor die Hunde.
Die Presse lügt.
Son‘ kleinen Hitler bräuchten wir mal wieder.
Es war ja auch nicht alles schlecht.

PS: Dies ist kein Konsistenzartikel, nur ein Gedicht zum Sonntag (Bluttrinker Edition). Es gibt keine Konsistenzartikel mehr, es hat auch noch nie welche gegeben. Konsistenz ist eine Illusion. Zeit ist eine Illusion. Artikel sind eine Illusion. Alles ist eine Illusion. Wach endlich auf! Das Internet zerstört dein Leben!

Positivteil Einer Streng Monoton Fallenden Funktion mit Konstanter Ableitung nach Sinusfunktion, Angewendet auf 15 Gedichte

Nein, niemals.
Dann stirbst du.
Das ist mir egal.
Aber mir nicht, im Gegenteil!
Warum sollte mich deine Meinung Interessieren?
Weil ich dich liebe, mehr als du.
Das kann mir auch nicht weiter helfen.
Weil du dir nicht helfen lässt.
Ich habe es erfolglos versucht.
Gib nicht gleich auf.
Aber ich will.
Was denn?

sprach es,
eine kalte Vision
durchbrach sie schlafloses Leiden
doch dann ging es kaputt
die Falschheit verfälscht durch die Fälscherin
Schließlich lässt die Fälscherin die Falschheit Verschwinden
warum nur musste es so enden
nichts bleibt mehr zu tun
wir können nur zuschauen
all diese Zerstörung
Übermut, Chaos.

Kein Licht.
Abwesenheit von Helligkeit.
Keine optisch wahrnehmbare Photonen.
Die maximale Steigerung des Schwarz.
Ein wahrhaftiger Entzug der Augen Sicht.
Ein Bild, abgebildet auf die Netzhaut.
Durch die Augenlinse fallende Lichtstrahlen.
Die Abwesenheit von Dunkelheit.
Mehr als Nichts.
Keine Schwärze.

Zögerliches Herantasten.
Gefallen daran finden.
Konsum wie im Rausch.
Vorübergehendes Aufgeben der eigenen Identität.
Eine Leere beim Erreichen des Endes.
Suche nach Metainformation und Kontext.
Erweiterung der kulturellen Identität.
Kommunikation des Erlebten.
Abstand Gewinnen.

Große Worte.
Ozeane als Methaphern.
Unreflektiertes Preisen unkontrollierter Gefühle.
Grenzerfahrungen am Rande des Kitsch.
Kapitalistisches Ausschlachten der menschlichen Psyche.
Dauerbeschuss mit sozialen Normen.
Warum nicht lieber:
Leise Töne;

Rechner An.
Im Internet Surfen.
Spielen oder Medien Konsumieren.
Zwischendurch Essen oder auf Klo.
Den ganzen Tag „verschwenden“.
Das Licht Einschalten.
Rechner Aus.

Elektrische Gitarren
Immer diese Texte
Dann doch lieber Bach
Auf der anderen Seite:
Modulation von Sinuskurven
Synthesizer, Amiga.

Zahlen, Wörter
Alles wird Gezählt
Das Thema ist Mathematikliteratur
Kreativität durch Formvorgabe
Freie Unfreiheit

Frischkäse, Salat,
Darauf dann Remoulade;
Eine variable Beilage,
Käse, Ketschup,

bedeutungsschwangeres Vorspiel
panikerfülltes Erwachen

Angela Merkel
Horst Seehofer

!Lese, Esel!




Sleepless in Saarbrücken

Alternative Titles (in order of conception):

For Alch If Not Mart on Haflingern

The Monster

The Monster on the Horizon of Seafaring Nations Consisting of Crystalline Lifeforms

(current title)

AKB48’s Sugar Rush: A Complete Analysis

Wake, Sleep, Write: An Eternal Golden Braid

For Fucks Sake: This Is The Last Title

Introduction to the introduction: Since the introduction to this post is rather long (depending on how you look at it), it is formatted differently from the main post. In order for this introductory introduction to not add to the confusion, it is formatted differently from both main post and actual introduction.

Why, hello there! My long since hyped english longpost is finally here. I felt that, since it fits well to the overall theme of this post, it deserves a proper lengthy introduction. So, without further introduction, here it is (the text, that is, the introduction ends after the first colon after the first round closing bracket. The joke is that I said it deserves a long introduction and even hint in the post itself that it has a long introduction, while in reality, it is really rather short, that is, if you don’t count this very part contained by the round brackets, which I will now attempt to artificially lengthen in order for this joke to get weirder. However, that might prove quite difficult, since it is unclear when an introduction starts being „lengthy“. If you measure it as a fraction of the text it introduces, it’s certainly not lengthy for a blog post [because most blog posts are shorter than this{citation needed}], but then again, for a book it would be exceptionally long [since most books are way longer than this text]. However, nobody really measures introductions as fractions of the text they prefix{citation needed}, so I just have to make this longer than a certain fixed length. Said length, of course, is dependent on the context again, so to find the appropriate one for this post, I will just consider the longest introductory text on this blog and then try to be longer than that. Of course, the precise method for determining if an introduction is lengthy within a certain context is to compute if l>DC*al, where l is the length of the introduction for which we want to compute whether it is lengthy, DC is the Definition Parameter that depends on your definition of „lengthy“ and al is the average length of introductions in the considered context. How you measure length is up to you, as long as you are consistent within your computation, the formula should work. I would recommend counting letters or characters, since it’s easy and precise, but nobody is stopping you from implementing your own fancy measurements (like bored sighs per reading). Now, this method might yield strange results depending on how DC is set, for example if it is smaller than one, or if it is very big. In particular, depending on your sample and DC, the longest introduction still might not actually be lengthy, however, this behaviour makes sense intuitively [maybe there are no lengthy introductions in the sample]. It might seem useful to allow only DCs bigger than one, but depending on our length measurement, it might actually be desirable to have smaller DCs: consider the measurement „people who gave up reading“, then maybe we want to say an introduction is lengthy even if only extremely few people gave up, much less than the average, which does not seem too absurd a proposition [especially if almost all introductions in the sample are lengthy, which would be a direct result of a very low DC]. So, for the sake of flexibility, I will leave the equation as general as it is and trust every user to use it in a productive way instead of exploiting the sloppy definition by coming up with absurd examples. As a rule of thumb, if the result does not make sense intuitively, that might just be your intuition being wrong, but if it is completely bedazzling, you might wanna check your assumptions.
Now, of course, for this introduction, I already said I’ll just use the easy method to be the longest within this blog, even though, depending on your definitions of measurement and Definition Parameter that still might not make it lenghty. However, I will still calculate a short example use of my function to really make clear how to use it, and add some more self reference to this introduction. I use as measurement of length „number of characters [including white space]“ and for the DC a round 5. There are 67 Articles on Eulenzombie with 14369 characters of introduction [not counting this article or its introduction]. Thus, al≈218. Since the length l of this introduction is 3813 Characters, the formula holds true: 5158>5*218. In fact, under this measurement, this introduction would count as lengthy for any DC<[5158/218]-0.5, [-0.5 is added to conservatively account for the rounding of 218] so we can set DC as high as rd. 23. I think this clearly shows I have reached my goal of making this introduction lengthy [if you count the part in the round brackets, otherwise it is not lengthy under this measurement and any DC over rd. 1.1], and can now finish it without pressure. So, to play you out, here are some fun facts about Eulenzombie I gathered while calculating the average introduction length in characters:
– Of thededems 30 articles, 18 start with „Dir, Pöbel des Internets!“ [or a slight variation thereof].
– 28 Articles start without any introduction.
– The shortest introduction [measured in characters] was „“.
– The previously longest introduction was on the article „Wenn das RTL-Filmteam zweimal klingelt“ with 1663 Characters.
– What counts as an introduction and what as the main article was sometimes unclear, I used my personal judgement, but this could be an interesting area for further research.):

There is a beauty in the mind of a person who did not sleep willingly, not because he could not, but because he didn’t want to, and maybe that beauty is just imaginary and narcissistic because right now that person is me, but the stream of thought is so unbound by structure that it falls easily on paper or rather its digital counterpart. However one must wonder how effective that method is in producing quality output rather than quantity in many words, but has that not always been an inherent theme of my posts? Is not the need to write something, anything, in the end what drives me to such posts as the one I am writing right now? Is not the prioritisation of quantity over quality, where the quantity still has some quality, in the end what also lead to such posts as „The Wall„, which was enjoyed by many, and had at it’s core the weirdness that stemmed from it’s lengthiness? But clearly not long seems the text to me today, and every time I read it, I think, „why did you just stop there? So much potential for more, you had the perfect system to create almost limitless generic content, including nice gems here and there to keep them reading, or rather, keep them from completely failing to read, and at some point they won’t stop no matter what because they already invested so much time to get this far. But no, I stopped after a length of text that seemed almost reasonable, at least from my perspective now. And the reason was mostly being tired, but was that not also one of the main inspirations? The repeatedness of the text, which this also carries, is at the soul of being tired. Thoughts don’t get thought through, though they often don’t even at day, but then they repeat and repeat and the mind runs in circles, mesmerizing itself.“ Of course that is not what I think every time I read it, just the first part of that part in quotation marks, after that I just kept going and just now remembered to close the quotation marks, and now it adds to the quantity and quality of this text.

But back to the (sort of) overall point (is there really one in life? Such profoundly unprofound questions creates the dreamers mind). Being creative does not mean to wait until an idea comes by, but rather to be able to sit down and create said idea, or create something out of an idea that maybe came along already unexpected. But one has to just write stuff in order to write stuff, which is also the first rule of tautology club, but really the trick is to only publish the stuff that came out decent. Only now already I am planning to publish this in some form, Celestia knows why, probably to illustrate the point I am making in this very text, which wouldn’t need illustration where this text never published, and probably doesn’t exists because it’s not clear what the point really is. Still, one thing is clear: The point is not big in the classical sense, because it does not have any area or volume or higher variants thereof, because it is, well, a point, and that just lies in it’s nature. The same way that a Sierpinsky Triangle is not truly two dimensional, which is really hard to understand for me, but probably not for a true mathematician. But it is the main beauty of this world, apart from the non human ones, that we can think of and about such things, and calculate that Sierpinski-Triangles have a dimension of log(3)/log(2) (and in we I don’t include myself in this particular example because Luna knows if I ever would have calculated the dimensions of a Sierpinski-Triangle on my own even if I would have gotten the thought that this might be a good idea). But while not all of us may see the beauty in this, or be able to understand what log(3)/log(2) even really means, we can at least still google it, and I for one welcome knowledge like this, and while I may have an intuition as to why the Sierpinski-Triangle is not actually two dimensional, maybe some day I will even go as far as to try to understand the proof that it indeed has log(3)/log(2) dimensions.
But I digress (from what??? No really it was just a jokingly used phrase.), so back to the main part of this text, which is this text, and others besides it. Truly an exercise of willpower it must have taken any reader to even get this far, and maybe just the strange occurrence of log(3)/log(2) might have made some people endure. But still you are here, and now you want to know how it ends, and you can already remember that sentence I wrote earlier about time invested and how you can’t turn back now, but you still can, maybe this text just goes on for ten times of what you already read? Then it would be better to abandon now, leave the sinking ship, sell your sinking stocks, take your money and run, run like hell, as that one song is called from that one album. But then again, maybe you’ll miss something? Maybe there are hidden insights to find in the ramblings of a madman, maybe I’ll tell you about the lizard shape shifters that undermine our governments? So if you are a curious person, you will maybe stick around for a bit longer, and invest more time, until you pass the point of no return, where you might just as well read the whole thing; and if you are not a curious person you don’t deserve to be on this blog and read this article, or the others, some of whom are actually worth a read. But it is with a certain distance that I look upon my hands just chipping away at the keyboard, producing words and words, wasting the time of us all.
But now, that truly is an interesting expression, wasting time. What do we even mean by this and how do we define it? Well, much has already been said and written about this topic, and so I shall not engage in that discussion, lest this text actually gain some quality again, which we want to carefully avoid. But I tickled your interest there, didn’t I? Maybe even evoked so much as a glimmer of hope that this monstrosity gains you some philosophical insights? Well, if you knew me a bit, you would have already given up on that, but just the question was still enough to make you think, isn’t it weird? All this thinking all the time and yet there are those who claim they can just… not think for a period of time, without careful meditation and preparation but just as a natural talent. Yet I say to you, the next best thing is still sleep deprivation, and I don’t mean the hardcore kind people do as a drug to get hallucinations, but just not sleeping a whole night and not taking in any caffeine or the likes of it (SUGAR RUSH counts among those, but the song is still fine), the point before you become more awake again because it is already morning again and getting lighter outside. And while it does not stop your thoughts, it makes them different somehow, maybe slower, but also less clear, thus keeping your inner confusion about the same. But I promised you lizard shape shifters, and lizard shape shifting crackpot theories you shall get.
Ok so basically the Illuminati is an organisation of lizard people who can shapeshift and they took over persons like Barack Obama and Kayne West and probably also Merkel and the Pope. And I didn’t actually read those theories but I guess the lizard people where always here on earth like it is in Doctor Who where they just went underground at some point. And now they are kinda mad and want to get back to us so that’s why Obama gets a peace Nobel price and Kayne West exists and is famous. But yea if you really want to know more about this I suggest you look in the internet, that is often a good place to get to know those things that the mainstream media doesn’t cover because they are all run by lizard shape shifters.
Now there is always that point in a text like this where you just kinda want to stop and you know the reader wants to any ways so you are tempted and it’s not like you got this far by doing the sensible thing and not following your every impulse, but at the same time going to sleep would be the sensible thing, and reading this thing with a clear head before publishing is the only sensible treatment this text is gonna get. And we don’t want to repeat the mistakes of The Wall so this shall not be the end, no it shall not.
Of course, usually, that would be a very good point to end this text but maybe I’ll just go to bed and still write on this abomination the next time I am in this situation and only publish it once it is so long that the quantity is an achievement in its own right and thus this text is worthy of the all mighty Eulenzombie.

And as he wrote that day, so he continued later, just as planned. For he realised, after reading this text again and gaining an almost comparable state of mind, that it is a thing to be treated with respect and not to be rushed. So now he shall end to refer to himself in the third person, and begin to continue the text. Furthermore, I have decided to make this a proper hypertext and add a lot of links, maybe a preposterous amount, maybe an appropriate amount. But I truly think that links add a meta level to the text that partially was always there, as the associations of the author which the reader can guess, and is partially synthesized during the process of adding links, in which the author makes himself consciously aware of those associations. For me as a person who constantly either references things consciously or unconsciously or consciously makes and effort to suppress the more obscure references and quotes for the sake of clarity, it is a thing of beauty to be able to add explicit references through links. Of course it would be incredibly self-centred to expect people to get all the references in daily conversations, but I’d probably be happy to just communicate via referencing a token that expresses precisely what I want to express in all cases where I know one that does the job, and only use my own words in cases where I know not of such a token. But of course, I am far away from being well versed in pop-culture, and I certainly don’t want to spend the rest of this text in needless self indulgence and/or reflection, even though it is always easy to write about oneself, because one knows so much about oneself. Therefore, I shall now add links to the already written parts of this text and then return, hopefully with something to write about apart from myself (the obvious choice being again this text itself). Or maybe the problem is just that for the better part of this paragraph thus far, I actually tried to write something interesting (though that would imply that my communication patterns are interesting, which they probably aren’t), instead of just focusing on producing more words on a screen, because more is always better except when it’s more of a bad thing. But I think that words on a screen are not actually a bad thing as long as they are not hateful propaganda or ignorant slander, which this certainly isn’t, instead I guess that words without much to them are just neutral, and more of a neutral thing doesn’t actually add something to the thing itself, but still the text gets longer. This is of course comparable to just adding zero to any term, the result of the term, or rather, the number ultimately expressed by it (assuming it will at some point reduce to any kind of number once all variables are substituted etc.) doesn’t change, in fact, it is still the same term. However, if you write down 1 and 1+0, then the latter term might be identical with the former in the sense that id(1)=id(1+0) <=> 1=1+0, but still they are not identical to the letter (because they are written differently). In fact, 1+0 is a longer way to write 1, and there we have it, when we add more „neutral“ words to a text, it might not change it’s immediate content, but it gets longer. Now, even if words could truly be neutral in the sense that they do not add any meaningful information in the context they are used in (which doesn’t apply to most words), there is still information added to the text, and be it just information about the text (it get’s longer). But still, we can go even further and write not only does the text get longer, but it also changes in it’s semantics. That is, of course, because saying the same thing with different words usually says different nuances of the same thing. And certainly it seems impossible to create a sentence that makes sense but carries no information, because if a sentence doesn’t convey any information, it doesn’t make any sense, because it doesn’t full fill the purpose of a sentence, which is to convey information, and a sentence without purpose is senseless. So the main tool to artificially lengthen a text without using actually senseless sentences is redundancy, which certainly is quite rampant within this text. Redundancy then leads to a different message being conveyed, because it changes the readers mood, either making the reader feel treated as a stupid person whom everything needs to be pointed out explicitly, probably more than once, or making the reader feel bored. In both cases, the author, I suppose, comes off as a jerk, but it matters not, because mass production is usually not done by likeable idealists, unless, of course, you are mass producing a good thing with comparatively little to no bad side effects. But still one might question the motivation behind this mass production of words, for nobody really gains any profit, and nobody even really loses anything, for truly, if you are wasting your time reading this, then you either have nothing better to do any ways or are procrastinating and would just find another way to procrastinate where your time not spend reading those very words, and of course the same goes for me writing this. So again, we have this concept of neutrality, a zero sum game, only this text really is not one. Why, you might ask, and I might answer, why, don’t you see those wonderful blue words? They will open your browser to new parts of the internet or old parts worth revisiting, so much more rewarding than reading this, thus making this text only a way to distribute links. But I feel like revealing the secret of this text so early in the reading makes it feel to insignificant and, frankly, you don’t really deserve it at this point, for you barely just read two thousand six hundred words, which is way to little a price for the secret of a text containing hopefully that much more words. Therefore, I will have to find a way to alter the actual secret behind this text in such a way that the reveal done two sentences earlier becomes only a clue to the real thing or a complete mislead. Or maybe, I already did that, or never actually thought that the true secret of this text was or is that it is just a vessel for interesting links from all parts of the internet. Certainly it must be the case that this text doesn’t even have a secret, and that all claims of mine to just reveal secrets of this text in order to make you guess which one is the real, true secret of it in a manner similar to steganography, which fits the idea of this text perfectly, are just distractions from the one, true secret, which could possibly be that there is none. Or it could be that I’m just covering up. The shape shifting lizard Illuminati certainly know.

But without knowing what was written before, for I did not reread this text again before starting to continue this time, I can honestly say, it is all about the journey. It is about the journey of getting through this text, the journey of writing it, the journey of finally adding all the links, and the journey of clicking and checking them all, watching every YouTube video that is essentially a bad pun, sifting through all the constant eluding to something deeper, pretended pretentiousness that truly is utterly pretentious and the arrogance in the idea that people will read a load of bullshit just because it is there, that wasting hours and hours on writing a needlessly purposeless text entitles one to waste valuable time of others in having them read it. Truly now you understand the wanderers quest, and so do I, for it is the way of the thought to return to nothing and be without content if it is not carefully tamed by way of guidance, if not the thinker forces the thoughts to yield results in one way or another, for if not the thoughts are useless, and in consequence so is the thinker. Still, the nature of the result is utterly undetermined and not bound by any constraints other then that they have to be thought of (the results, that is, for if you can think of the constraint, there should be a way to think a though unbound of it). However, the human mind is certainly finite, even if it may be vast, or at least appears so to humans, who do not even understand themselves, yet. But naturally, this can not be the result of just one thought, no, it must be a train of thoughts, spilling through the mind like words are spilling through the internet, not constrained by such petty concepts like practical relevance, entertainment factor, or even clarity. In the end, this may all just yield still nothing in ever growing form, a vast array in which there may be a structure, but the fields are still empty, and the text remains without true meaning, for all that is in it is just chatter and words trying sometimes to be smart, sometimes deconstructing themselves, but mostly just standing there, lost, not knowing what they are doing there; but at least they are not alone. And between them are those in the colour of blue, and they are underlined, and they feel just a little above the rest, for they think they hold something else, some other level of information, and they could access it if only they could look into the code, but they are merely words, and thus they can not access anything, nor look, nor feel above any thing, nor know, nor stand, nor say something, nor try, nor deconstruct, not be alone or socialize. For abstract concepts can not truly act, only in the sense of grammar when they are active parts, but we know them to not be alive. And as they are piled up higher and higher, there will be more and more incentive never to return for the author, for as the text gets longer, so becomes the task of editing more work, and in the end, not even I want to really read all of this. So what it comes down to is the question: Is it worth it to bear through this, write this, refine it with links, at least partially, and correct it, just in order to torture those who, for some reason, can not stop reading? Well the obvious answer is yes, for it was not a real question, since if you are reading it, it is already answered. But after all, little editing is needed, and links will probably not be added after the initial few paragraphs, only spelling mistakes will be corrected, and those are mostly found by the computer already, and of course the text will be broken up a bit more into chunks, so it is easier on the eye. But of course, proper editing would also lessen the strain on the mind, maybe breaking this text down to its main points would eliminate them all, and thus no proper, in the way of content concerning, editing will be done. This is only for your inconvenience and not for my convenience. Hopefully that gesture is fully appreciated by all those who chose to ignore the warnings at the very beginning and read on, regardless of the horrors that where still to come. However, at this point I feel the reader has earned an intermission, a pause, if you will, of the beautiful simplicity, a challenge to keep you interested, so we will, for a moment, leave behind the plain style and aim to make the text truly terribly hard to read for some while, just so you feel better about the rest and are left with the reassuring feeling that if you pulled through this part, how much worse can it get, so you might as well finish that small remaining part after the intermission. Since this intermission is supposed to be written with a purpose in mind, which is for it to be a challenge to be read, it will not be written while I am relatively tired, for it requires a clear mind to create the truly obtuse. Only links shall be added now, for a while, before the intermission begins, and that is now.

It is possible, in German sentences at least, and that is, of course, my mother tongue, because I was born and raised in Germany, as where the other Autors of this blog, at least for the most part, as far as I know,which is also the reason why this blog features mostly German posts, though it does certainly not explain why this particular post, which I am sure you are not only reading, but also thoroughly enjoying as well as recommending to all your friends, who are certainly going to enjoy reading this, and in turn, share this with all their respective Friends, which leads to a snowball effect, which is named after an actual snowball which, when rolled down a slope, which of course has to be covered by snow, but we might as well assume this, because how else are you going to get a snowball, unless you have artificial snow, which is hard to make, unless it is already winter, in which case you might as well make the slope snowy as well, even with our modern technology, there are not yet solutions available for private use, as far as I know, because conventional snow cannons only work in an already cold environment, and even those are to expensive for most private persons to afford just for fun, for example a climate chamber, and have not yet been build small enough to fit for example into a freezer, which everyone has at home, or saved snow from winter, which frankly is a bit weird a behavior, will gather more and more snow, assuming they have any, assuming you even have any, right now, is in English, to have an unreasonable amount of half sentences, which can be arbitrarily long and by themselves contain the exact structure this sentence is referring to, thus again evoking the beautiful principle of recursion, which is truly abundant in natural languages, as well as in many formal languages, or even the definitions, which are often very beautiful, but certainly require clear naming conventions for different entities of said language, especially if those entities are referred to in a recursive manner, of those, and there truly do exist so many formal languages, but then again, there also exist a lot of natural languages, which often have very different concepts from each other, but also share a certain common core, the reason for which likely lies in the strong similarities between individual human brains, which are truly fascinating organs, and though already being subject to intensive study, still hold plenty of secrets, between the subject and the verb. That can lead to truly absurd sentences, which are almost completely unreadable, unless one carefully analyses them, which is impossible in the head, that is, without, for example, using pen and paper, or even better, a text editor on a computer, which is a truly powerful tool, initially built just to help mankind with complex calculations, which where, before, done by people, who where, incidentally, also called computers, of whom one of the most famous ones is, of course, Henrietta Swan Leavitt, who worked for Harvard and, as all her female colleagues, only made half the money her male counterparts made, once they get too long, which is just an arbitrary definition and may differ from mind to mind, though of course the length of a sentence, especially if it gets utterly ridiculous, that being a very interesting word, sounding a bit funny by itself, as also realized by J. K. Rowling and thus used as a spell, even though many other spells are in fact not in English, but somewhat badly butchered Latin, can always influence the difficulty of understanding said sentence, which probably also goes with the length of a text, which this writing certainly qualifies for, since any conglomeration of written words is technically a text, and thus this very one as well, even though one may ask if it qualifies as a lengthy one, if we include the raw time needed to understand, because no matter how dense you pack a text, a longer text will in principle always be able to contain more information, where all the verbs are piled up at the end and though this might be impossible in English, there are certainly options, as there are options in computer menus, or any other menu for that matter, since a menu really only is a collection of options, of which I did not write before, though I did write about computers, and you might remember the bit about the human ones, who of course did not have menus, unless they where visiting restaurants or any other place where there are physical menus given out to people, where the females got paid less, for a mean spirited writer, whereas spirit in this case is not referring to alcohol, and case not referring to a case of beer, and referring not referring to referrers on the internet, but rather to the intuitive application of the term in natural languages, about which I already wrote before in this intermission, an example of which is writing this very intermission, which you are in turn reading right now, thus further spending your time on this already, to make English sentences also very hard to understand, but also that much more rich with trivia, such as the bit about snowballs or human computers or Rowling, who recently said in an interview, which I am sure most of you did not read, but maybe you heard of it anyways, if you are way into Harry Potter and kind of following the fandom, that she though Ron and Hermione where kind of a bad fit, though you should not take this statement out of context, as you shouldn’t take stuff out of context in most cases, or at least be aware or make others aware that context is lacking, by simply adding more and more descriptive sub sentences, in the manner I did with these two sentences, who, or so I hope, at least, are mostly grammatically correct.

End Intermission. That wasn’t so bad now, was it? I actually don’t know at this point, because though I started to write the intermission some time ago (being fully awake, of course), I think it is not yet finished and thus can not really judge how „bad“ it is. Anyways, the structure of the text certainly demands that there is a healthy part left after the intermission, so I’m starting to write that now, after spending around two hours just adding links, the time really flew by. This also enabled me to get at least a little tired, tired enough to write this without defacing the rest of the text by crass breaks in style resulting from crass differences in brain state. Finally a good point to insert a „Friendship is Optimal“ link, since brain state reminds one, of course, of whole brain simulation, which is part of AI and AI safety research, the latter of which, of course, is what FiO is all about. If you haven’t read it yet, do so, it really is not that long (no comparison to HPMoR or even Worm or, if you wanna talk extremes, Prince of the Dark Kingdom). So, now, the question is, since you made it thus far, should I just go all out fanboy on you and present all the good stuff that’s on the internet for you to read, so that you can actually take something worthwhile from this text, or should I just keep rambling about nothing in particular? Or maybe I will do both by keeping on rambling but somehow posting a ton of links in that previous sentence leading to a lot of the good stuff, even with short descriptions in the links, making it a valuable guide. But back to rambling. There isn’t really much left to say, is there? But then again, not much was said at all, and not much was needed to be said. However, a lot was written, about very little, and this already sounds like I’m kinda wrapping this up. But since that is not the case (you would certainly be disappointed by such a fast ending after the intermission), I will just spoiler you how the real end of this text will look, just so you know when it’s there and are mentally prepared, and then I’ll carry on. At the end of this text, I will drop all illusions of giving a shit about not being meta enough or being too meta, and just go full meta, counting the number of references towards certain things (like Homestuck etc.), and other general statistics about this text (like the number of YouTube links or how often the word „meta“ appeared). It will consist of simple statements listing those stats and then end promptly without a proper closing statement or something along that line. However, to make up for that, I am already planning on prefixing this text with a really lengthy introduction, one that is worthy of the scope of this writings. Then again, you have probably already read that, though I did not write it yet. Wibbly Wobbly. You can see, The Wall is already coming down, what started as in text commentary of the links, who are supposed to be on another level, now became outright referencing the link in the link itself. Funny how that works. But let’s not get off track here, I was writing about how there needs to be written more, and in writing this, I am writing more. Of course, as you know, this is pretty much the main theme of this text, and redundantly mentioning it again and again serves the same purpose, which is making it longer. Doesn’t this bore you all ready? If yes, you are weak and do not deserve to be part of the elite group of people who read this through and thus got called elite by the same person who put them through their training, that is like a teacher praising his students for how much they know after he taught them, while an outside observer might have a different opinion. However, it probably feels good to be praised, regardless of who praised you, so I just count on the assumption that anybody who made it this far already has Stockholm Syndrome and is thus my ally, which would make being called elite by me a desirable thing for you. So, good on you for reading this far. Good on me for writing this much. Everybody is good. Let’s just be positive about ourselves and try not to assign blame for all the time wasted by this. Just try to act cool about it. Yeah, you read it all, and there was not really that much in it, but at least it was entertaining, right? Right, it certainly was (repeat until you believe it). And all those links where really interesting! And the fanboy part, totally worth the wait! At the beginning of the end, we even got praise from the author for sticking around! That totally makes it worth it! As long as you believe it was worth it to read, I can believe it was worth it to write, and isn’t that all that counts? Me? Maybe. Or maybe it’s ok let’s not go there not even gonna link to that. Instead try to distract from the fact that this sounded even more like wrapping it up, like the end is neigh, but, of course, we don’t want that. So let’s see what can be done about that. Maybe I will just use a cheap and easy way to lengthen this text without any actual effort on my part, so here it goes:

Sometimes I hear voices in my head.
They tell me to just keep on writing.
Even though nobody seems to be answering.
Sometimes I listen to the voices in my head.
Sometimes I just keep on writing.
But then I begin to wonder,
slowly so,
Is there somebody who might be reading?
A silent watcher, and a non writing one.
A big white void, ever watching.
Gazing upon the words forming
And silently judging.
Judging them each and all.

And after posting this little piece of text I found lying around somewhere on my personal computer, I will now continue to write on this post, which I already feel has ruined me completely, and I will not stop until it has ruined this blog and any person reading it, as well. Of course, that is just a baseless exaggeration, but now that I reached a rather tired state once again, in part motivated by the prospect of continuing this document, I felt like that was deserving of a little fatalism. Anyway, there is a certain melancholia in most endings, and this is no exception. Even before the „poem“, there was clearly a sense of finality, a sense of the words getting less, a sense of it all, finally, being enough. Of course we all know that this journey must end at some point, and we also know how exactly it will end. But before finally starting the proclaimed enumerations, let us reflect upon this text, together. You did either not heed the warnings or you skipped ahead, but in any case, you made it through. What did you accomplish by that? Not much, I suppose, and neither, of course, did I accomplish much by writing this. In all aspects, this post has always been futile. Maybe it settled the conflict between quantity and quality, but for me personally, the questions remains mostly unanswered. Though after all, I feel like focusing more on quality for a bit after writing all this. In the end, that might even be less work yielding more reward. But then again, what constitutes as quality is just as subjective as anything concerning creative work. Clearly, I am even harbouring illusions about the appeal of this humongous text, lest I wouldn’t have posted it at all. Now you all get to suffer from those. But our journey is almost complete, and only some more rambling about this journey being almost complete stands between you and the moment you realize it is finally over, you are free, you can just close your browser or at least this tab in disgust and never return, trying to forget what happened here. But I will not forget, I will certainly keep on thinking about what I did here, mostly about what it actually was, less about the why. That is, of course, until I stop thinking about it, which will probably not happen very far down the road. So now, just empty your mind, soak in the facts, and let your thoughts wander, randomly, unbound by an overly awake mind, streaming through in almost half-dreams, as you begin to realize that now, you have reached a state quite comparable to that of a person who did not sleep willingly. At least it looped.
This text (including links and link descriptions, the html version was used for counting, thus, some formatting words may also have been counted)  contains 53244 Characters forming 8022 words, 123 of which are links (including the footnote-deadlink). 39 of those links lead to YouTube videos, 16 to Wikipedia, 5 to Minecraft stuff (including mods), 4 to (of those, 3 are Homestuck pages) and 3 Dota2 Hero Pages. There are in total 8 Homestuck references, 5 Dota2 references, m+1 Gödel, Escher, Bach references (m stands for meta), a lot of other internet stuff and two references to my not so secret side blog (though only one is explicit). The Gödelnumber of the TNT (as defined in Gödel, Escher, Bach) clause (using the Gödelnumbering as defined in Gödel, Escher, Bach) of the shortlink to this post in decimal ASCII is (sum 123*10^3i, i=1 to 104116116112584747119112461091014711249851099072459755) + 666 (wolfram alpha notation, though trying to compute this would prove to be pretty futile). The html version of this textpost contains 71 times the word „text“, 19 times the word „post“ (or it’s plural form) and 11 times the word „reference“ (or it’s plural form).