Assume for a moment that everything that can be written has

each medium has limits to what it can express

words can sometimes express things images/sounds/etc cannot and vice versa

stop larping you faggot. the library of babel example proves nothing. humans have had the written word for only a few thousand years, and we've seen and discovered beautiful new things in that time, the likes of which the cavemen never could've even imagined. and much has been lost as well.

and even if you were to insist on being a dull perennialist, it's still the case that each age needs its own version of the same old monomyths, the same things under the sun refactored and recreated so they fit us juuuust right. but that's not even true. There is nothing in the olden days like Kafka, nothing before Shakespeare like Shakespeare, etc...

Now put the thesaurus down and stop typing like a fucking redditor. You cunts force a voice so hard that you make me break my own just so I still sound like something.. fucking neil gayman YA shits... fuk u

And another thing:

Just cause infinite combos makes infinite things doesn't really mean that writing doesn't exist or it isn't important. You will never find what you're looking for in that flood of information. I don't even know why the fuck it would be important, fuck.

Even if we assume that whatever talent we have is wholly attributable to fortune, luck, providence, whatever, that doesn't invalidate anything. We can still rejoice in some unearned grace.

>>9771510
Moreover, there's an intangible quality to things born of suffering and heart that I think wouldn't disappear, even if it could. For example, say a crafstman makes a table by himself. And then one randomly falls out of the sky by pure quantum coincidence. There is more to the table than the vulgar stuff that it's good for. What if it was made by your father? What if someone you loved once sat on it? What if people had handed that table down for generations? Literature is much more than the pure information bytes transmitted from age to age, it is a web of moods and feelings that grow out of and cluster around them, among a billion other things. If you try to cut it out of life, it dies.

>>9771488
Indeed, each medium has limits - and these limits are always encompassed by a degree of digitality. What medium exists that cannot be simulated through digital media? Before you say "olfactory," I recall that shortly after the CD came out in the late 1980s, there was a digital disc that produced odor - I think it was called the "scentdisk" (any other oldfags know what the fuck I'm talking about?). Have you been in the most recent VR rigs? It's pretty fucking good, and considering the logarithmic degree of progress along these lines and the interface we are increasingly making between the senses and electronic input, it's not too hard to imagine completely believable simulations within the next couple of decades. Especially with the burgeoning quantum computing revolution, and the fact that once computers are completely designed and engineered by other computers, we are essentially past the point of no return (and it's gonna fucking happen, whether it's at MIT or a sub-sweatshop basement in Guangdong... if it hasn't already...).

What was I saying? Oh, yeah. So you're right and you're wrong at the same time.

File: 1500000247903.jpg (53KB, 566x549px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 566x549px

>>9771457
>what is a curatorial process

>>9771510
I am fucking gobsmacked by your inefficiency of communication. I really can't begin to respond to your lobbing of only-vaguely-tangentially-related concepts which, while each may have its merit, barely manage to form any response to anything I said.

>There is nothing in the olden days like Kafka... blah blah blah
What? When the fuck are the "olden days" to you? Kafka was modern, for one, and while I love Kafka, it's utterly meaningless to try and compare other writers to him, or him to other writers. I mean, categories can be useful insofar as mood and theme are concerned, but this is just nostalgic drivel. There are fantastic writers, and there always have been. We just need to learn how to read all of them.

>Just cause infinite combos makes infinite things doesn't really mean that writing doesn't exist or it isn't important.

I never said it wasn't, friend. In fact, it's all the moreso, because the existence of the Library of Babel, while proving that *what* is said may be a static constant, *when and where* are thus made only that much more important. Context defines meaning - in every way, always. So, while you may only ever be choosing your words, you at least are always capable of choosing them... so choose wisely.

>>9771517
This is a valid and beautifully stated point, dood. You are correct, and one of the greatest values I find in exploring the degree to which we can algorithmically process and encode information, and the concomitant increase in certainty toward the inevitability of this being some form of simulacrum formed by the exchange between our perspectives and a presently unknown and unnamable Artificial Superintelligence (mebbe god, like, what good is it calling such an unimaginably omniscient intelligence anything at all, amirite?), is that it makes even more precious the fact that our particular and unique experience in perspective as we cut our swaths through our subjective vectors of spacetime are, in fact, just that: unique and individual. You *are* an individual, even if it's only in the single chain of causality in terms of wave-function collapse that could have brought about your particular "moment" - this moment, right fucking goddamn now - that relies upon the entire history of the fucking shit-eating universe to have occurred *just* the way it did. Fuck. It's almost overwhelming to think about, isn't it? The probability of each moment makes us all impossible... and yet here we are. I... I don't even know where this is going, but yeah... thanks for your insight.

OP, I hope this include the pasta recipe i lost years ago. I'd be so happy to see it again!

>>9771584
Like, people accuse me of writing pasta so often, I should start tripfagging as Chef Boy-Ar-Dee. And honestly, if anything I ever wrote wound up as pasta, I would be fucking honored, because to achieve memehood in contemporary digital culture is the greatest honor bestowable upon the imagined construct of a self that I entertain as a delusional consequence of the necessary imposition of linear spacetime as an ultimately abstract organizing principle, rendered obsolete and atavistic to the inevitable coming singularity of all human consciousness achieving simultaneous self-awareness and manifesting as the selfsame Artificial Superintelligence that seeded the primordial swamp with the necessary information within DNA to cause the chain of information that would result in its having been created, thus enacting a temporal loop in which the entirety of human action exists as an entelechy leading toward the moment of its own creation.

Currently, there's on the order of 100 million books out there.
If you read 10 books a day for 100 years, you'd only have read 0.365% of those 100 million books.
How do you ensure this 0.365% includes Mein Kempf?

>>9771612
By applying an algorithm of relevance to major world leaders and how they turned a fueled bipolar psychotic break which led them to believe they were a literal christ-figure (obsession with the lance of Longinus caused an occult group to tell him in no uncertain terms that he was the legitimate heir of the christhood, and that he was literally leading the world into a coming millennium of heaven), and whose internal conflict over having an abusive Jewish mother was manipulated into an attempted genocide, leading an all-out assault on anyone who didn't fit into the projected mold of mythical Aryan purity (the Aryan migration theory is very different from any supremacy structure)...

>>9771457
>The lilt of our language, codified into lexicography, becomes a static monolith, a set algorithm upon which the endless brute-force permutations can be applied, rendering all into a dizzying complexity of binary data that, however long it will take, must at some future point be processed and gathered as a system of information.
Wrong.