My interpretation at 9:33 (of the colorful orbs falling) was a representation of "Drowning in paint" to the reference a character made to the film "The PageMaster" a few screenshots back, which is pretty colorful as shown in the film; If you look at the scene it shows macaulay culkin running around trying to look for an exit out of the library he is in while paint falls from the ceiling. If using that reference along with the "recession" of the islands I'd say this would be a point in the story that "Has no escape" or "the point of no return" especially if it's in reference to that person's comment in the story, the person ends with "the tape went hay-wire and stayed on the point where he's drowning in paint" or something along those lines. If I was to take a deeper meaning behind it, I'd say of course it's not possible to drown in paint, or be trapped in a library with no escape; But in connection to Amber and the entire story, abuse, especially that of a child can feel, and in some aspect can BE a life of no escape.
The moment I saw a term called 'Recession of the Islands' in a story called '3D Workers Island', my mind went straight into the idea of an economic recession, plus the way the characters are shown working/living their lives,and then their world sinks away and vanishes, with the final 5x5 grid screen showing this was a widespread event. Of course, given the description of a disease within the story, it's hard to not see it as having drawn at least some inspiration from the world events we went thru just a couple years ago, the greater consequence of which being the hell of a recession looming over us right now. May be too surface-level a take, but it's where my brain went on first glance, hah. That said, I, admittedly, haven't always agreed with your takes over the years, but I can't quite lie and say they are uninteresting. It's honestly fascinating to watch you brainstorm these things and get an approach to a piece of media that is fairly special compared to peers. Looking forward to the final analysis!
I interpreted Good Kid’s signature as something they themselves didn’t write, but instead was put there by Pat Lawler to discredit them after Good Kid’s attempt at exposing her, followed by the banning for good measure. Also, I’d never heard of Good Sky, but I am interested in anything Tony Domenico makes at this point.
Also, maybe the ‘sweet and angelic mommy’ part may be edited from something else by PLawler using her administrator powers, as someone else in the comments said about Good Kid’s subtext/blurb. Those two things to me compared to the rest of their writing seem out of place. I have not finished the video but I think this also lines up with PLawler constantly denying any deeper truth/complexity/disturbing elements in 3Dwi, decrying them all as complete hoaxes despite being known about by multiple people and included in exterior website and fan headcanons about the screensavers. Someone who is like this and also gives unsolicited criticism of parenting in a situation where it is clear help is needed (helping a child make a model where things like hot glue or staples might be used), she would definitely censor the speech of Good Kid to make them fit into her image of what a good child should be like. To hide any negative opinion about her/abusive elements of her behaviour just as she hides/calls hoaxes the things in 3Dwi that have been referred to by others as references to abuse. EDIT: rereading, I notice that PLawler uses a smiley face when telling the other user off for helping his son, which is also in GoodKid’s blurb at the bottom of their posts but does not feature in any of their other writing. More evidence of her tampering.
34:49 I like this part a lot, being able to run more screens as a basis for rhetorical judgement on what is true and false. I feel like while this ties in with the idea of unreliable narrators, it also highlights power in terms of being able to validate and invalidate views. This paralleled in P having mod privileges in the forum. And @ 38:19 when you mention Thomas having a systemic critique, when I view that in terms of power, it’s the power of the creators voice, or authors voice, which allows them the position of being able to critique the system (that they created or at the very least are still running). With all the characters being a little sus, I don’t know if anything they say can be trusted. Based on what we are given, there are also not many screenshots for us to go on. I agree with you that the work is not about coming up with narratives or uncovering what is actually happening to the individual workers in this thing. 39:55 “this is a work of systemic horror, and the insinuation is that “worker degeneration” is a class condition. It is baked into the way the screensaver is designed. It is bakes into the underlying worker concept.” And then I also feel there is a horror in which we as an audience have our perception controlled by limited information and source material, and how little we are able to actually interact with it. We are shown what we are shown and that’s it, which is not a critique of the work, I feel the work is great in what it communicates! I guess I like to view this thing through a lens of power. ((Not that I feel your interpretation is not important, it very much is, and u will awaken class consciousness one day 加油努力 拉屎要用力！))
I was sceptical about two approaches: the meta-commentary on Petscop and the Marxist approach based on what was covered in your first four episodes... ... then Amber turned into a ball, and the words "recession of the island" were explicitly used by the author about "worker island"...
In regards to Computer Philosophy & "Falling Into Asphalt Imagery", I'm not sure if you ever returned to talking about this but since I remember in a previous part of this you expressed a real confusion in regards to that page (as you're meant to, probably). I *think* I have some idea of what it's trying to say, but of course it's just my interpretation, sorry if this all reads as a mess: The page speaks to the idea of one's perspective in regards to looking through windows. A window can be a screen, or something like your own eyes. We can look away from a TV, but we cannot look away and/or outside of our own perspective. If this is true, then what would happen if you could decouple our own perspective and sort of step out of ourselves? When the page asks "where are we?" I think it refers to that hypothetical new perspective that would exist if you could decouple your own perspective. "This is the only meaning of I'm trapped in the TV" could mean that being "trapped in the TV" is essentially having your perspective become stuck. The TV/window becomes your world that you cannot look away from. Imagine, then, walking on the street one day and you trip and fall onto the pavement. For some reason, you cannot look away from the asphalt you're stuck staring at. That asphalt has become your world. The page also seems to imply that guilt and/or your past can alter your perspective forever and can be stuck that way. At the very bottom, we see a monitor with shapes that become 3d and then seem to escape the monitor. Did those shapes step back out of their own perspective? Did they peer into our world and fall into it? There's a ton more I could say but you get the idea, I think (hopefully). One more thing I'd like to mention is the dichotomy of world vs island. I am still real messy on this but I wonder if world is meant to be that which is outside our perspective and Island is our personal perspective that we're stuck in. What would that mean for an island to recede? Maybe it's the same as stepping out of our own perspective? Then again, the phrase "recession of the islands" seems to imply that it's not *us* that is moving, but the island is, so maybe it's the opposite and our island perspective is somehow moving without us. 3D worker's island takes advantage of resources in the world.
There's something comically dumb about Pat Lawler invoking and praising the Snopes hierarchy of truthfulness only to universally declare all hoaxes and "hoaxes" completely false, invalidating the obvious need for such a complicated hierarchy in the first place. But it'd be a lot more sinister if she didn't lay her intentions out like that. It would lend her some level of the appearance of a reasonable authority figure if her hierarchy theoretically allowed for some so-called hoaxes to be somewhat true, but she silently never actually applied those ratings.
The first time I saw the intermission with the balls falling, I thought that it was the representation of another screensaver, because I wondered how someone would take screenshots of 3dwi, and when I looked it up I figured out you had to use some kind of demo mode in the settings in order to be able to press keys to take screenshots so the screensaver doesn't turn off instantly, however, that means if you wait long enough with this demo on, your computer would then use the normal screensaver. I thought worker degeneracy would mean going back to the screensaver that was installed before 3dwi, and that it could be part of the world the read me file mentions
In my opinion this "general alienation" is actually part of the definition of physics. One of the consequences of general relativity is that all physical objects must be learned about through physical processes, like a beam of light, or humans communicating through words or pictures, and if we don't bounce a photon off something there is physical detail about it we don't know. Physics produces the concept of light-years, the concept of measurements changing wavefunctions, and also this so-called "alienation" between people and material objects or other people
I think the different colors indicate it is inherent to the worker condition and each worker is a different color either that or the same process happening to Amber in the game, if we take the degeneration as a symbol of abuse, happens all the time many different people IRL
> someone in the comments kinda elaborated how it should be pronounced based off its latin etymology, but I'm not gonna remember that shit sorry, am an etymology nerd. tldr it means "skin lakes". good video anyway!
What 14 year old is using the word "ostensibly"? Clearly the kid's smart, but that really stuck out especially with how they described their mom; it felt like an adult trying to write as a teen
@@masterstealth11 Oh same, I was that insufferable kid tossing out 5 dollar words; I always try to remember kids like us were the exception and not the rule 😁
My interpretation at 9:33 (of the colorful orbs falling) was a representation of "Drowning in paint" to the reference a character made to the film "The PageMaster" a few screenshots back, which is pretty colorful as shown in the film; If you look at the scene it shows macaulay culkin running around trying to look for an exit out of the library he is in while paint falls from the ceiling.
If using that reference along with the "recession" of the islands I'd say this would be a point in the story that "Has no escape" or "the point of no return" especially if it's in reference to that person's comment in the story, the person ends with "the tape went hay-wire and stayed on the point where he's drowning in paint" or something along those lines.
If I was to take a deeper meaning behind it, I'd say of course it's not possible to drown in paint, or be trapped in a library with no escape; But in connection to Amber and the entire story, abuse, especially that of a child can feel, and in some aspect can BE a life of no escape.
I really like this interpretation! I think this might hold some water actually
The moment I saw a term called 'Recession of the Islands' in a story called '3D Workers Island', my mind went straight into the idea of an economic recession, plus the way the characters are shown working/living their lives,and then their world sinks away and vanishes, with the final 5x5 grid screen showing this was a widespread event. Of course, given the description of a disease within the story, it's hard to not see it as having drawn at least some inspiration from the world events we went thru just a couple years ago, the greater consequence of which being the hell of a recession looming over us right now. May be too surface-level a take, but it's where my brain went on first glance, hah.
That said, I, admittedly, haven't always agreed with your takes over the years, but I can't quite lie and say they are uninteresting. It's honestly fascinating to watch you brainstorm these things and get an approach to a piece of media that is fairly special compared to peers. Looking forward to the final analysis!
I interpreted Good Kid’s signature as something they themselves didn’t write, but instead was put there by Pat Lawler to discredit them after Good Kid’s attempt at exposing her, followed by the banning for good measure.
Also, I’d never heard of Good Sky, but I am interested in anything Tony Domenico makes at this point.
Also, maybe the ‘sweet and angelic mommy’ part may be edited from something else by PLawler using her administrator powers, as someone else in the comments said about Good Kid’s subtext/blurb. Those two things to me compared to the rest of their writing seem out of place. I have not finished the video but I think this also lines up with PLawler constantly denying any deeper truth/complexity/disturbing elements in 3Dwi, decrying them all as complete hoaxes despite being known about by multiple people and included in exterior website and fan headcanons about the screensavers. Someone who is like this and also gives unsolicited criticism of parenting in a situation where it is clear help is needed (helping a child make a model where things like hot glue or staples might be used), she would definitely censor the speech of Good Kid to make them fit into her image of what a good child should be like. To hide any negative opinion about her/abusive elements of her behaviour just as she hides/calls hoaxes the things in 3Dwi that have been referred to by others as references to abuse.
EDIT: rereading, I notice that PLawler uses a smiley face when telling the other user off for helping his son, which is also in GoodKid’s blurb at the bottom of their posts but does not feature in any of their other writing. More evidence of her tampering.
34:49 I like this part a lot, being able to run more screens as a basis for rhetorical judgement on what is true and false.
I feel like while this ties in with the idea of unreliable narrators, it also highlights power in terms of being able to validate and invalidate views. This paralleled in P having mod privileges in the forum. And @ 38:19 when you mention Thomas having a systemic critique, when I view that in terms of power, it’s the power of the creators voice, or authors voice, which allows them the position of being able to critique the system (that they created or at the very least are still running).
With all the characters being a little sus, I don’t know if anything they say can be trusted. Based on what we are given, there are also not many screenshots for us to go on. I agree with you that the work is not about coming up with narratives or uncovering what is actually happening to the individual workers in this thing.
39:55 “this is a work of systemic horror, and the insinuation is that “worker degeneration” is a class condition. It is baked into the way the screensaver is designed. It is bakes into the underlying worker concept.”
And then I also feel there is a horror in which we as an audience have our perception controlled by limited information and source material, and how little we are able to actually interact with it.
We are shown what we are shown and that’s it, which is not a critique of the work, I feel the work is great in what it communicates! I guess I like to view this thing through a lens of power. ((Not that I feel your interpretation is not important, it very much is, and u will awaken class consciousness one day 加油努力 拉屎要用力！))
I was sceptical about two approaches: the meta-commentary on Petscop and the Marxist approach based on what was covered in your first four episodes...
... then Amber turned into a ball, and the words "recession of the island" were explicitly used by the author about "worker island"...
In regards to Computer Philosophy & "Falling Into Asphalt Imagery", I'm not sure if you ever returned to talking about this but since I remember in a previous part of this you expressed a real confusion in regards to that page (as you're meant to, probably). I *think* I have some idea of what it's trying to say, but of course it's just my interpretation, sorry if this all reads as a mess:
The page speaks to the idea of one's perspective in regards to looking through windows. A window can be a screen, or something like your own eyes. We can look away from a TV, but we cannot look away and/or outside of our own perspective. If this is true, then what would happen if you could decouple our own perspective and sort of step out of ourselves? When the page asks "where are we?" I think it refers to that hypothetical new perspective that would exist if you could decouple your own perspective. "This is the only meaning of I'm trapped in the TV" could mean that being "trapped in the TV" is essentially having your perspective become stuck. The TV/window becomes your world that you cannot look away from. Imagine, then, walking on the street one day and you trip and fall onto the pavement. For some reason, you cannot look away from the asphalt you're stuck staring at. That asphalt has become your world. The page also seems to imply that guilt and/or your past can alter your perspective forever and can be stuck that way.
At the very bottom, we see a monitor with shapes that become 3d and then seem to escape the monitor. Did those shapes step back out of their own perspective? Did they peer into our world and fall into it?
There's a ton more I could say but you get the idea, I think (hopefully). One more thing I'd like to mention is the dichotomy of world vs island. I am still real messy on this but I wonder if world is meant to be that which is outside our perspective and Island is our personal perspective that we're stuck in. What would that mean for an island to recede? Maybe it's the same as stepping out of our own perspective? Then again, the phrase "recession of the islands" seems to imply that it's not *us* that is moving, but the island is, so maybe it's the opposite and our island perspective is somehow moving without us. 3D worker's island takes advantage of resources in the world.
There's something comically dumb about Pat Lawler invoking and praising the Snopes hierarchy of truthfulness only to universally declare all hoaxes and "hoaxes" completely false, invalidating the obvious need for such a complicated hierarchy in the first place.
But it'd be a lot more sinister if she didn't lay her intentions out like that. It would lend her some level of the appearance of a reasonable authority figure if her hierarchy theoretically allowed for some so-called hoaxes to be somewhat true, but she silently never actually applied those ratings.
The first time I saw the intermission with the balls falling, I thought that it was the representation of another screensaver, because I wondered how someone would take screenshots of 3dwi, and when I looked it up I figured out you had to use some kind of demo mode in the settings in order to be able to press keys to take screenshots so the screensaver doesn't turn off instantly, however, that means if you wait long enough with this demo on, your computer would then use the normal screensaver. I thought worker degeneracy would mean going back to the screensaver that was installed before 3dwi, and that it could be part of the world the read me file mentions
In my opinion this "general alienation" is actually part of the definition of physics.
One of the consequences of general relativity is that all physical objects must be learned about through physical processes, like a beam of light, or humans communicating through words or pictures, and if we don't bounce a photon off something there is physical detail about it we don't know. Physics produces the concept of light-years, the concept of measurements changing wavefunctions, and also this so-called "alienation" between people and material objects or other people
I think the different colors indicate it is inherent to the worker condition and each worker is a different color
either that or the same process happening to Amber in the game, if we take the degeneration as a symbol of abuse, happens all the time many different people IRL
> someone in the comments kinda elaborated how it should be pronounced based off its latin etymology, but I'm not gonna remember that shit
sorry, am an etymology nerd. tldr it means "skin lakes".
good video anyway!
No need for apologies! I thought your post was interesting.
40:30 Why does this remind me of Benatar?
What 14 year old is using the word "ostensibly"? Clearly the kid's smart, but that really stuck out especially with how they described their mom; it felt like an adult trying to write as a teen
I used that word when I was 14? Probably to sound smart
@@masterstealth11 Oh same, I was that insufferable kid tossing out 5 dollar words; I always try to remember kids like us were the exception and not the rule 😁