how to display:
- save file as aquine.1
- run in your commandline "man -l aquine.1"
more info about "manpages":
https://liw.fi/manpages/
-----file:
.TH AQUINE
.SH NAME
aquine \- searching paranoia and serendipity
.SH SYNOPSIS
.B aquine
[\fB\-h ]
.SH OPTIONS
.TP
.BR \-h\fR
Will help you!
.SH DESCRIPTION
.
-. . .
-` - ` . . . .
.. - . ` :c ., .+ .
-~, =x, : - .. ~ ,
., .~ - ... = _ .
.x, . ]. . =>. - : -
__. -]::., +]i . x%=; .- v _.
-- =d]; :=/ +_. -q,=:43=; = j' .:-
- -++, ::.?kuuXqc=jz.:^: .
._, ` .=u=;=xdXQoqmwdQCao=x. .
").., ~*G,=4#00###00#mw:=_;
. -:++xadmW00##0000#000LjGx_, ...
.,._,:::=uu34#00##00#00#0#00f?x;:. -- -
- :-~~--~-::==+40000#0#00#000#0k=:.:.. . .
. .._,::xnmd###0##0##00##00k=;. . . ,.
aaa, . .,.?H*Q000#0##0#00#Ca;=:,.
ajmad]!?HSga**Ga, ._-: -.-+=3%HQ#0000#H93x>-::-];._;.--, .:_a, . .-
. _a3!*9*XQnaa/?*na_+?naa. =!) ?!Gcaaxo=!3]==;--`. .aaamaawmWR340BHNUaa__: .-
!\W*W##m;,-"?!+) -"!~--- . +=x=;!]XO=+n==%o;+. ._4###V!g#D"~"!"` ---~` ` .
-42 ::-"~~ _,_=xa;aa=xxxxx=a_a_a_a____.-!^:_:,______a_;d!+xxdO%=u%333OXX33%` ._.-
:d{ x;dW>.:u._??*NW!?*#WOW0WWWWWWWXXG%: .-+mmmWWWWWW##WW##WW##0#0##0##W#0#k, W_
X#{ =;d#}.:?{; :`-, :-~+:4WWXN##W#XX2= . :#000#0#0000#00##000000000#####0}. Wu_,
UX) ]:4Cxd7"S2=a==a#00waad00##0##WmUG>. . .N#0000000000#W#0#0#0########W#0}: #kx.
If there is software for tasks, then there is software for no tasks. Normally this type of software is called QUINE and will output itself. But what is about software that refers to itself and still observes others. This software is called AQUINE and searchs for paranoia and serendipity in structures. A worm
why the theological framework?
because we have been stuck and talking suspended between many dualisms
such as: hardware/software, code/data, material/immaterial, giraffe/zebra
but, they are all based on a dualist framework lasting millennias
the quine is interesting cos its a piece of code that outputs itself, therefore self reflexive
but, it exposes also the problem of dualism
why analogy? because we can understrand/expose software either univocaly or equivocaly
so, we must find a poetic-way-of-analysis
like: a worm(soft) that goes through like a worm(butterfly)
the worm, in the end, is a bug (to find the worm you debug)
or: run a software in debug mode so that you see the function, where it is(Gottfried)
poetic: as a certain elogism as used by the russian constructivists
that is to oppose something not connected together, a sort seredipity that binds things together
so: a software that observes software must create moments that bring us to a new meaning
or: we can observe the bebug argument itsefl; is it just printing out? how about the imputs?
-bug mode?
another element that could create this tension:
the idea of software as sequential instruction and the wave of parallel computing
so, can we actually create parallellism into the sequential construction?
an anlogy of parallel computing
but could we have this tention with multiple parallel processes running from computers connected to the same server?
could that be our serendipity?
we need to develop an entire new language, that you cant name.
programming language is an instruction sect: uts like thinking like a machine
so why is called a language at all? so the computer gets anthromorphized and the human gets machinized!
********************
"A quine is without why. It prints because it prints. It pays no attention to itself, nor does it asks whether anyone sees it."
"Aquine is aquine is aquine. "
Aquine is not a quine
This is not aquine