Comments for Concerned Netizen

Comment on 1995 – Derrick de Kerckhove on Marshall McLuhan by Dante Diotallevi

Dante Diotallevi — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:26:43 +0000

Profound remarks and observations on McLuhan. Thank you for sharing!

Comment on A Pretty Decent Proposal by CRTTT

CRTTT — Fri, 09 Jan 2026 21:35:42 +0000

What a nice read my friend.
I’m glad that I came across your work, all thanks to Vibekoder 🙂

Looking forward for what’s next!

Comment on Marshall McLuhan: The First Second-Order Cybernetician by Olga Stein

Olga Stein — Sat, 27 Dec 2025 16:20:46 +0000

Correct the following: ….But second-order cyberneticians ought TO HAVE noticed what McLuhan was trying to say here. It’s a shame THEY DIDN’T.

Extremely interesting analysis. Brilliant, in fact!
What was McLuhan doing? As you suggest, he may have been attempting a synthesis of the newer concepts with the older framework that was familiar to him (the two weren’t incompatible, as he saw it). He was also bringing the au courant terminology into his desired conceptual framework so as to underscore what his and the newer frameworks had in common.

Great work!!

Comment on Cheating at Peekaboo against a Bad-Faith Adversary by Luisa

Luisa — Sun, 20 Jul 2025 11:29:45 +0000

I read this yesterday and I went to sleep thinking about it and spent the whole day today thinking about it. I have read lots of your work and I am fairly familiar with your stances but the way you laid everything down is very rich and thought-provoking. Great job.

Comment on Four Part Resonance by Domenic Molinaro

Domenic Molinaro — Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:48:31 +0000

Amazing read

Comment on Information isn’t a Substance and Ideas are not Viruses by Marc

Marc — Sat, 17 Aug 2024 00:16:29 +0000

#2 resonates because when I was a small child, I had nightmares that the Cookie Monster would jump out of the television set and eat me.

Comment on Turning the Friggin’ Frogs Gay in Three Easy Steps by Clinton

Clinton — Sat, 20 Jul 2024 01:47:51 +0000

In reply to Eva. The internet was certainly way different when I was using it as a teenager in 2003-2006—and even *then* I felt like I had missed out on something. MUDs would have been crazy!

Comment on Turning the Friggin’ Frogs Gay in Three Easy Steps by Clinton

Clinton — Sat, 20 Jul 2024 01:46:55 +0000

In reply to Erik Van Till.

Do it for science! 🥽🧪

I'm not considering this as a matter of gender identity in any cut-and-dry sense. Queerness in its modern usage entails a far broader spectrum of traits and is, I think, more amenable to understanding as related to early childhood and teenage development.

Comment on Turning the Friggin’ Frogs Gay in Three Easy Steps by Eva

Eva — Sun, 14 Jul 2024 20:11:40 +0000

My own personal experience differs from this interpretation, in that in transitioning I mostly gave up on virtual interaction and stopped “seeing” cyberspace. Maybe it’s just being old, but I sometimes feel like how dogs must feel when they see people looking at screens. Ironically though, my entire healthcare experience w/gender-affirming docs and such was conducted entirely through websites and video chats with disembodied heads. So I’m on the fence about the truthiness of this proposition, but I’m going to let your writing percolate in me for a bit and see how it goes. Subscribed to ur substack, really love ur work; I really grieve over how shite our cyberspace is compared to those writers’ vision of it

Comment on Turning the Friggin’ Frogs Gay in Three Easy Steps by Erik Van Till

Erik Van Till — Sun, 14 Jul 2024 20:07:46 +0000

Idk, but i’m gonna try not projecting invisible structures that are encoded in signs and see if that makes me any less trans. Then I’ll try the opposite for good measure.