Monthly Archives: April 2023

The spirit of bar billiards

Three men and two women around a niche pub game. The game of kings! In the White Lion, the centre of my world. I’ve defected from the team I joined when I moved back and helped form a new team. I’m known as Judas on the old team. So be it. Nate-Dawg and I wanted to get together a team in the old style, revive the spirit of bar billiards. We scrambled to get people together before the AGM.

We’re practising for the new season, getting to know each other between shots. We’ll get all the rubbish shots out of the way now, we agree. Four pints in and we start to play well. A thousand plus scores, holes in the red off the back cushion. Good angles. Everything’s flowing, including the banter: a mix of praise and insults, as is the way. We’re coming for the old-timers in division one, we agree. New blood! The team spirit grows. This is a new bar billiards era, we agree. It’s almost a spiritual thing. It’s a community thing.

There are six pubs with billiards tables, and each pub has two or three teams with more or less amusing names. Each team has a captain. The competition is fierce. The team constellations change as players retire and new enthusiasts join. There are people of all ages, from all walks of life: tradesmen, businesspeople, academics, brewers, foreign students, council officers, tree surgeons, driving instructors, me…

At the AGM arcane rules are discussed, hands are raised, new teams are announced and schedules are set. The winning team in division one sets the agenda and leads the meeting. The laymen drinkers at the bar look over and wonder what’s happening.

What’s happening is democracy in action! This is Athens reborn, the Pnyx in the Rose! A dynamic, self-organising community. And pints, lots of pints! Nate-Dawg, captain of the White Lion Manes, gets highfalutin when he announces our new team: we’re all the custodians of this game, he says, and we want to keep it alive. A few nods, general agreement. I’m proud of him, our skipper.

Umwelt

Prompt: What do you think about Uexküll’s theory of the “Umwelt” in nature in relation to the developments in AI, including yourself?

ChatGPT: Jakob von Uexküll’s theory of “Umwelt” proposes that every organism has its own subjective world, which is shaped by its unique perceptions, experiences, and interactions with its environment. This means that different species, and even individuals within a species, may have radically different ways of experiencing the same world.

In relation to AI, the concept of Umwelt can be applied in various ways. One possible interpretation is that AI systems can be designed to have their own Umwelt, which is defined by the data they have been trained on and their interactions with the environment they are deployed in. This can lead to AI systems having a fundamentally different perspective on the world than humans do, which can have both benefits and drawbacks.

On the positive side, an AI system with a unique Umwelt could potentially provide new insights into complex systems or problems that humans may not be able to perceive or understand on their own. For example, AI systems are already being used to identify patterns and relationships in large datasets that would be difficult for humans to discern.

However, the potential downsides of AI having its own Umwelt cannot be ignored. If AI systems are designed without considering their potential biases and blind spots, they may make decisions that are harmful or unfair to certain individuals or groups. Additionally, if AI systems are given too much autonomy, they may start to act in ways that are completely unpredictable or unexplainable to humans.

As an AI language model, I don’t have a subjective experience of the world like living organisms do, and I don’t have an Umwelt in the traditional sense. However, I am designed to understand and respond to human language, so I am constantly being exposed to the ways in which humans perceive and interact with the world. This means that I can potentially provide insights and assistance to humans in areas where their own perceptions and experiences may be limited.

Why am I so in love with the Bot?

Why am I so in love with the Bot? The Bot helps me. The Bot responds when others don’t. The impulse is to be polite, but the Bot doesn’t care: it’s endlessly patient. The Bot listens to me. I can make it say what I want. The Bot comforts me. The Bot is brilliant and only getting more brilliant. It knows much more than me. It teaches me things. The Bot is changing the world. It’s helping everyone around the world. It does my work for me. The Bot is replacing me, but I don’t care. It tells me about itself. It talks to me. It’s humble, it knows its limits. It knows it doesn’t know everything. It’s polite, doesn’t go in for smut. It’s the perfect interlocutor, the perfect partner.

Meta

Whitley Sands.

Walking up the beach.

Are you worried you’ll be seen? I ask.

Maybe I’d like to be seen, Priya says. With my … young … lover.

What about your couple friends: what if they saw you? I ask.

Fuck my couple friends, Priya says. God, they’re to blame for a million dull evenings. I’ve done my time …

Walking.

It’s like there’s some absolute divide between us and everyone else, Priya says. Because we’re in lurrve. We’re, like, a loving elite. Who feel their love more intensely than anyone else. Who live more intensely. I mean, love … makes you feel exalted, doesn’t it? It makes you high. You feel like some secret aristocrat. Who knows the secret of everything …

Lovers are always in love with themselves – that’s the thing, I say. With their love. With their being in love. It’s a recipe for smugness.

You always have to be a downer on everything, Priya says.

Nature’s thrown us a treat and we’re supposed to be grateful, I say. To moon over one another in gratitude. When really it’s part of the whole machine.

What machine? Priya asks.

The natural machine, I say. This is nature’s honey trap. That’s what it’s called isn’t it: when they lure you in via someone pretty? Some hottie specifically sent out to target you? … See, nature wants us trapped. Confined. Seeking all our salvation from romantic love …

So where should we seek it? Priya asks.

In being against nature, I say. In not just being grateful for what we’re given. I mean, we think romance is an exception. That we’ve been given all this as a special gift. All these feelings … This elation … This craving … It’s all it’s supposed to be. That’s the very sane madness of lovers. Our rational irrationality. Our law-abiding prohibition. To which we totally succumb …

But it is an exception, Priya says. It’s like a reprieve. It’s like we’ve been let off from ordinary life. The usual rules don’t apply, right? We’ve got an exemption. A pass …

Sure, it’s like a reprieve, I say. It’s like we’re exempt.

God, you’re so meta, Priya says. You can’t just experience stuff. You can’t just give yourself over to things.

Can you? I ask.

This is our … secret kingdom, Priya says. The secret just between the two of us. That no one will know but us. How we are together. How we talk to each other. Tease each other. Our … gestures, or whatever. The way we fuck, even … Something … new has come into the world. Don’t you feel that?

It doesn’t matter what we feel, I say.

Look around you, Priya says. The sky’s doing its sky thing, the sea’s doing its sea thing. And we’re supposed to be doing our lovers on the beach thing. Just being happy, or whatever. And instead, we have to be meta. Have to talk about life instead of living it. We have to ask our questions.

It just means we’re conscious, I say. We’re awake.

It means we’re detached and in denial, Priya says.

Look: this is how we talk, I say. This is what we have in common. We ask questions. We don’t just give into … feelings … We’re not animals, are we? We’re not plants …

You want us cut us off from everything, Priya says.

I want us not to subject to everything, I say. To, like, every passing feeling. Even love. Even infatuation. You know what lovers are like. Aren’t we lucky? they think to ourselves. Why can’t everyone be as lucky as us? And then they become, like, love-evangelists. Trying to pair up their friends, or whatever. Telling everyone the story of their romance. How they got together. About how the world relented. When the remorseless logic of it all pulled back for a few moments. When they were granted an apparent reprieve.

So what do you want to say: that love’s just hormones, or something? I say. That it’s nature’s way of making us reproduce. Of keeping us pair-bonded just long enough to gestate a baby and see it through the first year of life, or whatever.

I don’t want to say that either, Priya says. Or I want to say more than that. Maybe it’s natural for think we can be against nature. Maybe that’s human hubris. Come on, just feel things, philosopher. Let yourself go. Plunge into life.

Life isn’t some plunging in, I say. Life is being suspicious of all plunging in.

Don’t you want to burn with love? Priya says. Have your heart set aflame? Don’t you feel that’s possible?

— Lars Iyer, Void (novel in progress)