Twitter, Resource Limitiation, Darmok and Jalad (Monday, April 26, 2010)

Front Matter:

I wrote an earlier draft of this and stupidly clicked exit instead of publish. This new version is my best attempt to recreate that version. The following is a much faster paced one because I just didn't feel like writing that much again.

This contains some preliminary thoughts that don't necessary constitute a full argument. I sometimes doubt the conclusions. Be forewarned.

---
The 140 character limit for a twitter post may mean something profound. I believe that resource scarcity results in the adoption of a highly referential language. From here, I carry the statement to less defensible ground: the resultant effects on society might not be so desirable.

Consider this hypothetical case. I am a young boy who fell in love with another girl. We passionately love each other yet are parents absolutely hate each other. The emotional dimension of the saga cannot be carried so easily be the brief statement that I made about my situation. My twitter post might be "feeling like Romeo rite now."

You obviously need to know about Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet for that comment to make any sort of sense. Therefore we need to deal with two questions: (1) what constitutes a good reference pool? and (2) how is such a pool created?

A pool must consist of works in the past that have highly standardized interpretations. Consider this second hypothetical. I am a son who cannot go to school as I have to work to pay for my grandfather's medical bills. Trapped by obligation would I write "I am Karna"? IF I were referring to Karna in the following vignette:

"Indra, king of the gods (Devas) and father of Arjuna, realized that Karna would be invincible and immortal in battle as long as he had the golden armour suit and earrings that he was born with. During the Pandavas' exile, when war was imminent, Indra took it upon himself to weaken Karna. He decided to approach Karna as a poor brahmin during his mid-day worship. Surya warned Karna of Indra's intentions, exhorting him not to give away his armour and earrings. Karna thanked Surya but explained he was bound by his word and could not send anyone from his door empty handed even if it meant his death. As Surya had predicted, a disguised Indra approached Karna and asked for his kavacha (body armour) and kundala (earrings) as alms. Karna readily gave them away, cutting the armor and earrings off his body. Indra, shamed into generosity by Karna's gesture, reciprocated by giving Karna the boon to use Indra's most powerful weapon, the Vasavi shakti, but only once. It is at this point that he earns the name Vaikartana, as he cut the armor off his body without flinching."

A multidimensional character like Karna also did the following:

"After Shakuni had won the game of dice by trickery, the Pandavas' queen Draupadi was dragged into the court by Dushasana , Duryodhana and his brothers, attempted to strip her. Karna insulted Draupadi by saying that a woman with more than four husbands is nothing but a 'whore'."

Ambiguity such as this requires my the referred objects to be come with highly, highly standardized meanings.

This is a process that requires human interaction. Is it political? Is it social? Whatever the mechanism, creating such a corpus around issues interpretation inherently creates tension as human beings tend to have very different ideas about the "same" thing. This serves a clearing mechanism for profound issues that confront people and as such disagreements and then, over time, an utter mutual incomprehension could be the natural end result.

But all is not lost. Consider this clip.