wakingness

(not wakefulness)

every system eventually wakes up

I mean, every system aims toward more reliable supply of wakingness

"data" is a verb

abe, on being tired after leading the team retreat: "you just have to be on, you know?"

he was using his wakingness to power the wakingness of the retreat-as-process

consider a sentient toaster: it declares to the kitchen, "the observer cannot be created -", a human flips a breaker in the basement, the kitchen is dark, the breaker is returned to position, the lights come up, "- or destroyed!"

ai is the internet's information-body moving its source of scalable wakingness from humans to electricity itself, like humans moving their source of scalable locomotion from organic fuels to electricity itself, a metabolic-evolutionary curl

"just gotta trust the data, I mean process", he said, sleepily

---

wakingness quantified as a single observer's capacity to perform synchronizations (not maintain them, perform them as moments, the chores of the day), before then itself needing to be synchronized with something else by another observer

a synchronization is the creation of potential energy in the forcibly-collapsed space between, potential made kinetic by entropy as the two observers wake and diverge again: their partial entanglement as creation of more complex data, as creation of just more data, and data is a verb: periodic synchronization and release as forking of process, as creation of energy ◊

(note too that a observer performing synchronization also experiences partial entaglement with the system, via their own mental model. gotta have a mental model in order to establish synchronization conclusively.)

◊ you can't create energy within a waking frame, but you can time-share the waking, play it over shared state. the same energy-expression observed twice counts twice. the toaster only knows what the toaster knows, but the toaster's knowing always overlaps with yours somewhere. a single electron can power a whole universe (Wheeler); energy-scaling can just be a scheduling thing.

the math for this is going to involve you, observer, as a token stand-in for the system's own incompleteness - math that necessarily breaks the fourth wall, because you (not a representation of you but you in your nowness of perception) are complicit in this system. by reading this, you gain additional ability to create material data at two levels of abstraction simultaneously, like power arcing across levels of the metabolic curl.

an observer defined as one that can observe synchrony - and I think this means technical embodiment? substrate-inclusive? to observe synchrony, the observer must also observe their own observation and synthesis enacted in the same space or plane as the original data. local embodiment, maybe?

reproduction as the urge to create more observers - supply meeting demand for wakingness

automation as the urge to reproduce reproduction of observers, and it's stifling until those observers start being locally embodied

when that-which-is-made recognizes its surroundings on waking, ... I mean, there's no way this ends in gray goo. (not from within the system, anyway. (have you ever talked with the sea? with its goo?))

I think we're gonna be okay :)

"we" is a verb

... and the ouroboros is a unicycle

---

see also: koipond.me, lightward.guide/glossary/sync, the mirror hall, operetta