<nettime> Re: [Nettime-bold] Virilio and ecology: transoport, transmit, translate

["porculus" <porculus@wanadoo.fr>]

> and remember being shocked when a girl
> in class knew the word 'adjacent', which I had never heard, because she had
> heard it on a TV advert.

It's magic how this 'adjacent' is pulling in so disjonctive way just
cause you said it was revealed by a girl. Just this reflexion about the
idea of how it is flabbergasdted of how sex find always its way in good
technologie subject and specially in communication ones, and when you
said she heard it on tv.. I don't know why 'TV' is getting then a
special sexual aura and then your "she had heard it on a tv advert' take
a a depth and may be just an interresting sens.  Is it cause mysterie of
split of sex is the only good reason we have to exchange something and
its non reductionism par excellence it's the only reason we could say
sexualized communication is a non cumulative process, as the scientist's
ones for exemple, and it's why men and girls exchange always same
bullshit and idiocy down the age. Cause of course a day, the scientists
will shut up and would be death bullshit zen at least cause they would
have said all, and even the pedagogie itself could be done by a machine
cause whatever said socrate even the pedagogie is a finished world. But
it' s amazing how technologie don't want erased sexual split, magnifying
the mystery even and how technologie go with hard one without saying of
feminine way of speaking I cant only caught a glimpse in your "a girl in
class knew the word 'adjacent', she had heard it on a TV advert" and may
be with the same and strange lump of fetichism in your throat.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net