User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human Parser/Amorphous Annotations Amassed: Difference between revisions

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
(Remove FOMO section)
(Remove manuals section)
Line 30: Line 30:


<span style="color:green">Rough draft. No references :[</span>
<span style="color:green">Rough draft. No references :[</span>
==About Manuals==
<span style="color:red">Necessary.</span>
<span style="color:green">About the shortcomings of Manuals, and the format of this thesis. Maybe start with micro-anecdote. I imagine this annotation would be on one of the first manual pages. I'm still planning to open the manual with an email / letter, and think these could be attached there.</span>
===Manuals, 1===
<blockquote>I will never be able to fully understand you.</blockquote>
My mother told me this<ref>She told me this in Dutch: ''Ik zal je nooit volledig begrijpen.''</ref> over the phone, about 2 years ago. I have a great bond with my mother. We are very similar in many ways, but also very different in many more. Many of our conversations end in a newfound understanding of how exactly we differ. We notice different things, react differently to sensory stimuli and our thoughts follow different patterns. We have different ways of processing the world, each other and ourselves. She's quick to remind me that 'we're wired differently' -- and I think she finds comfort in that.
It's the great human tragedy that we're never able to fully comprehend another person's entirety. Maybe you can get a momentary glimpse in an instant, through means other than words, but that understanding is never sustained. Reversely, never being able to be fully understood can, at times, feel like an inescapable loneliness. But the great tragedy of not-understanding also holds the great human beauty: continuing to try to better understand each other regardless.
In conversation, an image of your conversation partner is created in your mind. Pretending understanding is equating the person to that image, and restricting that person to your understanding of them. To instead acknowledge the grey areas of understanding is a generous gift that allows for connections to develop and evolve. Hearing my mother acknowledge this, was immensly valuable in feeling seen.
<span style="color:green">Rough draft. This turned out longer than intended, and very personal, and I make some grand statements about the human experience that are only backed by my own experiences. Making up my mind how I feel about it, and curious about your thoughts.</span>
===Manuals, 2===
<blockquote>Some people come with a manual.</blockquote>
This is another statement that addresses the difficulty in understanding. However, instead of embracing the beauty in that, this sentence creates the illusion that there's a concise way to overcome it. While the intention might often be an honest, good-spirited attempt to acknowledge our differences, there's an implicit friction to a statement like this. Instead of realizing that understanding is a continued, mutual effort, 'the manual' makes it seem as if just one party is 'the problem'. Moreover, seemingly it's that party's responsibility to come with a tool to help others understand them. What could be a wonderfully rich asymmetry, is turned into a hierarchical mess. Why do 'some people' need an outside tool to speak for them? What does this 'manual' entail, anyway? How can any manual possibly convey all human nuance?
<span style="color:green">Rough draft. The tone's a little harsh. I notice I'm continuously trying to condense my throughts, and end up with Frankensteinian texts. Also wonder here if I want to make an explicit reference to the format of the thesis, or if the decisions for that are / will be clear enough.</span>
===Manuals, 3===
Being told to 'come with a manual' is often part of the neurodivergent experience. It feeds into a curious machinal, robotical analogy -- a stereotype that especially autistic people face. They're said to be 'wired' differently.
<span style="color:green">Don't know if this needs to be here. Also, for the whole section: references?</span>


==About Prophetic Diagnoses==
==About Prophetic Diagnoses==

Revision as of 14:28, 20 February 2025

This page collects annotations that are small and don't warrant their own page. It is a drafting ground for in-progress writing, and some entries might migrate to a dedicated page as they grow. Also, as the manual grows, I expect more single line annotations to emerge, some entries to be broken up, and more fun to be had with the questionable linearity of the thesis!

About Thijs

Necessary. This annotation is about introducing Thijs (me), as an attempt to situate the thesis and to give context for the personal parts of my writing. I think it could be fun to have this entry be a bunch of micro entries.

About disassociation

Necessary. This annotation is meant to give a (my) 'definition' of disassociation. Can be short. Need reference(s).

About Text-Adventures

Necessary. This annotation is about talking about text-adventures, accompanying another entry talking about interactive fiction. The latter makes a thematic connection to disassociation. This entry should be more explanatory of what TAs are. Can be shorter, and should annotate an 'early' part of the manual. Main references Get Lamp and Twisty Little Passages.

About Obsolete Media

Nice to have. Annotation acknolowedging the connection to obsolete media. It seems like this axis is not super present, which I'm okay with (there might still be some pen plotter action), but I think it's still nice to mention, and might connect to some other entries (like a potential FOMO entry). Need reference(s). Ask Joseph?

About Functionality

Good to have. Annotation about the term 'high functioning'. The game features a 'functionality score', and the player loses normal control after exceeding this number. This entry should be connected to the manual's part about the functionality score.

Functionality, 1

As the word 'spectrum' suggests, the autistic spectrum comes in a continuous, multi-axial variety of flavors. Luckily, this is much better understood these days. However, I often still see the spectrum being mostly reduced to one axis: 'functioning'. Spending any number of minutes within discourse on autism, people are quick to talk about 'low' and 'high' functioning autistic people. 'low' and 'high' meaning to indicate how seemingly well an autistic person can function in society. 'Seemingly' being the key word here: it is a measure that is not a property of the person -- it reveals little information about one's traits -- but rather a property of judgement: the degee of functionality reveals the values of an environment, and evaluates the matter in which a person is a disruption in that environment. In that sense, 'functionality' can be a nasty measurement. Of course, there's a wide variety of different challenges people face, and some are more explicit and undeniable and shaping than others. It's good to acknowledge that, but I don't know if measuring 'functionality' is the way to achieve that.

functionality, 2

Compare 'high functioning' to another term: 'high masking'. This, in my eyes, does reveal more of the person's traits: the matter of masking tells us about someone's ability to sense and adapt to an environment, to blend in and suppress their natural tendencies. Some people might be doing this much (voluntarily or not), while others less (voluntarily or not). Moreover, while this metric is often reserved for discourse on autism, it is a metric that, to me, seems more universal. Whereas 'functioning' presupposes a system of values, 'masking' doesn't: it merely states the ability or tendency to mask to blend into an environment, which is not a evaluation of the environment.

Rough draft. No references :[

About Prophetic Diagnoses

Optional. About how a label / description of you might influence you, as a self-fulfilling prophecy. After the player's functionality score is exceeded, the 'day ends' and they are presented a report of their actions. Can be connected there (someone's narration of your life / person makes you that person).

About Parsing

Necessary. About parsers (both TA and human). ZIL, Aarseth, Montfort references? Can easily connect to e.g. action verbs in manual.

About Parsing, 1

The term 'text-adventure' breaks down into two parts: text, and adventure.

Adventure refers to an exciting experience, much like the quest to find a dragon's treasure and make it back alive, or the quest to buy groceries and make it back alive. [Nice opportunity for a quote not from game studies. Adventures are...] But aside from this definitional meaning, the 'adventure' in text-adventure reveals some history of the genre, referring to the 1976 game Adventure[1]. In this game, the player explores a cavesystem through basic instructions, like 'GO NORTH'. The game then narratres the results of these actions. Seen as a pioneer of the genre and a milestone in interactive fiction, literary critics Niesz and Holland note in a 1984 review:

In the development of interactive fiction, the original Adventure with its legion of imitators and successors is important because, for the first time, the game let the reader answer with words instead of numbers.

The 'text' in text-adventure also carries history of the genre. Not just the extent to which interaction with the computer was possible when the first text-adventure games came to be, and not just the natural link to literature and other fictions, text has proven to be a powerful, natural and honest way of interaction.

And if there were some technology which could enable you to talk straight to your imagination... well there is. It's called text. [...] And when you're typing, the output that you're tying is in words, same as the input. There's no shift. It's not that you're looking at a picture and typing in words, looking at a picture and moving the mouse around. It's the same environment, it's all words, it's all thoughts, it's all the imagination. (Richard Bartle in Get Lamp, 2010)

For the 'same environment' to exist, for a player to talk with semi-natural language to the game, part of program behind the game needs to interpret the inputted words: the parser. "The parser is that part of the program that accepts natural language input from the interactor and analyzes it." (Montfort, 2005) Room to elaborate here.The parser is that part of the experience that suggests an understanding between human and machine.

About Parsing, 2

So, putting text and adventure together, we see: text-adventure. "Such works are able to understand natural language input to some extent and, based on such input, to effect action in a systematic world that they simulate." (Montfort, 2005) To Nick Montfort, the simulated world is very important. In Get Lamp (2010), he notes:

It's like virtual reality that exists in words.

If parsing plays such a big deal in these virtual realities, it begs the question of the parser's role in non-virtual realities.

[and now make a bridge to the human side of parsing]

[dimensions of difference 'not much like reading']

[back to text parsing, and how this is not much like reading, but much more performative / interprative / fantastical]

References

  • Get Lamp (2010) [web]. Directed by J. Scott. USA: Bovine Ignition Systems
  • Montfort, N. (2005) Twisty Little Passages. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
  • Infocom (1989) Learning ZIL. [Coding documentation] (*)
  • Woods, D. (2011) Don Woods's Home Page. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20120831114211/http://www.icynic.com/~don/ (Accessed: 11 Febuari 2025)
  • Niesz, A.J. and Holland, N.N. (1984) Interactive fiction, Critical Inquiry, 11, pp. 110–129. Chicago, Il: The University of Chicago Press

(*) not currently referenced in text

  1. ↑ Nowadays more commonly referred to by the retronym Colossal Cave Adventure. (Woods, 2011)
Retrieved from "https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mw-mediadesign/index.php?title=User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human_Parser/Amorphous_Annotations_Amassed&oldid=289240"