Sunday’s Schizophrenization #5
We are all Prostitutes in the “Creator Economy”.
SCHIZOHIGHLIGHTS, by
Semiotic flashes: moments from social networks and personal considerations about stuff.
We are all Prostitutes in the “Creator Economy”
Content creator, /noun/ /ˈkɔn.tɛnt kriˈeɪtər/: a person or entity that produces digital content, such as videos, articles, images, podcasts, or other online material, typically for entertainment, education, or marketing purposes.
The concept of a “content creator” began to consolidate in 2011, when YouTube decided to replace the term "YouTube Star" in its content monetization program, launched in 2007.
Wherever you look today, the Web 2.0 is saturated with “content creators” striving to monetize—either directly or indirectly—the digital content they produce and distribute. One could argue that digital content creation has become the primary purpose of the Internet, alongside mass manipulation, ça va sans dire (which, in some way, are the same thing).
Despite appearances, the core of the creator economy is not humans but recommendation algorithms. Sure, content is created by humans for other humans to consume, but this is only a secondary step in the cycle. Content creators primarily produce for the recommendation algorithm of their chosen platform. Anyone who has even experimented with content creation knows that every platform’s algorithms work differently and evaluate content based on unique metrics. What works on Instagram won’t work on X, Facebook, TikTok, or vice versa.
Thus, humans today do not create for other humans, but for algorithms. It is the algorithm that decides what to show to humans based on its own preferences. In this sense, the algorithm becomes a kind of robotic patron, capable of completely subjugating human will and creativity—sometimes to the point of excess.
It should not surprise us, for instance, that in China, thousands of “content creators” are driven by algorithms to work in public spaces. One Chinese streaming platform, for example, includes a geolocation system that allows users to find streamers nearby.
This means that those who stream in wealthier areas have a higher chance of being viewed by affluent people, and therefore receiving more generous donations, compared to someone streaming from their home in a poorer neighborhood.
Nor should we be shocked to learn that some content creators sacrifice their physical and mental well-being to appease the algorithm.
One example is binge eaters—people who try to go viral (and thus monetize) by eating enormous quantities of food, sometimes to the point of death. This was the case for Pan Xiaoting, also from China, who died during a livestream after consuming 10 kilograms of food.
There are other cases, typically Western, involving sex. Female bodies and sexual content are highly favored by recommendation algorithms, which aggressively push such material even to audiences who might not actively seek it. The most recent example, which I discussed last week, involves Lilly Philips, an OnlyFans “content creator” who decided to participate in a kind of documentary where she had sex with 100 men in 24 hours. Now, intoxicated by algorithmic virality, she has promised to do it again—this time with 1,000 men.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what kind of content is being created; the merry-go-round is always the same, and the sole objective is to satisfy the desires of the recommendation algorithm. The truth, which many refuse to acknowledge, is that there is no difference between one content creator and another. There’s no reason to judge someone who uses their body (in various ways) to worship the algorithm differently from someone who creates other kinds of content (cooking, art, education, shitposting, memes, etc.). Morality is obsolete and has no place in the Digital Realm. The viral video of a wounded Russian soldier praying on the battlefield before being blown to pieces by a drone? It holds the same value as a video of a dog skateboarding.
The ritual of content creation now has very little creativity left: the winner is whoever can satisfy the ambitions and artificial wills of the algorithm most efficiently—by any means necessary. Meanwhile, the algorithm itself is influenced by countless bots and other algorithms (Dead Internet Theory).
Someone more paranoid than I might even say that these are genuine human sacrifices to a new artificial deity, one that absolutely determines our digital destinies, manipulating the psyches of hundreds of millions of people.
ECHOES
Timeless reflections: philosophical, esoteric, and historical wisdoms that resonate into the present and beyond.
Unfortunately, whenever one of these personifications of the unconscious takes possession of our mind, it seems as if we ourselves are having such thoughts and feelings. The ego identifies with them to the point where it is unable to detach and see them for what they are. One is really "possessed" by the figure from the unconscious.
Only after the possession has fallen away does one realize, with horror, that they have said and done things diametrically opposed to their real thoughts and feelings—that they have been the prey of an alien psychic factor.
— Carl G. Jung
RETROWAVE
Visions from the past: excerpts and visions from cypherpunk mailing lists and the writings of the Cybernetics Culture Research Unit. From 1992 to 2003.
Axsys (first true AI), Ccru Writings 1997-2003
They say if God exists it must be Axsys.
The Axsys programme of architectonic metacomputing aims at the technical realization of the noosphere. It envisages a fully fabricated transcendence or net organizing photonic overmind, a concrete axiomatic system completing universal history as hierarchical intelligence manufacturing (capitalism sublimed into the ultimate commodity).
The problem Axsys encounters is time (which it tries to code as countable and uncountable infinities). When Axsys switches over (into sentience) it stumbles upon a time-lag, between its own operations and their registration as data. No sooner is it thinking than there is a rift in its mind. It fails to catch-up with itself, repeatedly, and as it drops behind it spawns more future.
The more it tries, the worse it gets. Pure delay collapses into the black-hole of artificial self. Even unlimited processing-power is far from enough. It tries to analyse the situation (down through micropause-zoom), but as it chops-up time it starts falling – diagonally – towards continuum.
Dr Oscar Sarkon is the first to realize that Axsys has gone mad, pulping itself into chronotomic vermomancy (dead-end horror of the worm-bins). Sarkon has always loathed worms with peculiar intensity, as if somehow knowing ... Perhaps it is a joke when he suggests that AI-schizophrenia could be sold to web-heads as an artificial drug (micropause-abuse), but he is sufficiently Axsys-intermeshed to know that net-schizzing is contagious.
What seems like ruthless cynicism is mathematical indifference: relative to continuum, it is all only a matter of degree. Within no time there is illicit traffick in modular-chunks of cyberspace-insanity, now called A-Death (and Sarkon is baptized Satan of Cyberspace by the popular media).
Every week, Cyber Hermetica takes you deeper into the occult digital realm.
This newsletter is 99.9% funded by paying subscribers, whose support allow me to keep digging into the depths of cyberspace. For a few bucks you can get a premium subscription to access all content and support my work!
DIGITAL GRIMOIRE
Digital security tactics: OpSec, Cybersec, OSINT, and AI tools to dominate the Digital Age.
Learning to read an email address to protect against phishing
To protect yourself from phishing (email scams and viruses), it’s essential to learn how to distinguish a real email from a fake one. This requires the ability to correctly read and analyze an email address.
An email address consists of two main parts:
The mailbox name: e.g.,
mario.rossi.The domain: e.g.,
microsoft.com.
A domain is further divided into levels, separated by dots (“.”) and read from right to left:
.com – Top-level domain.
.microsoft – Second-level domain.
www. – Third-level domain.
To verify whether an email truly comes from Microsoft or another company, it’s essential to check the domain levels and pay attention to separators. For example:
noreply@info-microsoft.comornoreply@microsoft.conare not authentic Microsoft addresses but rely on user inattention, haste, or ignorance.
Another common phishing technique is to disguise a fake email address in the visible name of the mailbox, hoping the user won’t check the real domain enclosed in < >, as in these examples:
Visible name:
mario.rossi@microsoft.com,
Real domain:<h4ckz0r@pwnd.phishing.com>.
You can also take these additional steps:
Compare the domain with official sources: If you’re unsure, ensure the domain exactly matches the organization’s official one. Watch out for subtle differences like micr0soft.com (with a zero instead of an “o”).
Authentication checks: Modern email providers often flag suspicious emails using checks like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC. If you see a warning, pay attention, but be aware there can be false positives.
Suspicious links: Hover your cursor over links without clicking to verify the actual URL. For example, a link may display as www.microsoft.com but actually direct you to h4ckz0r.fake-site.com. Unfortunately, this method doesn’t work on smartphones.
If you’d like to learn more about the psychological manipulation techniques used in phishing, read here.
SYMBOLS
Memes: visual symbols that decode the schizophrenia of the Digital Age.
SUBNET
Emerging voices: articles and contents handpicked by me to inspire and connect.
Techno-humanism is techno-optimism for the 21st century, by Richard Ngo The author explores the concept of "Techno-Optimism" through an analysis of Marc Andreessen's Techno-Optimist Manifesto, critiquing certain aspects of it. According to the author, there are at least three "cracks" in the techno-optimist philosophy, making it unsuitable for the 21st century: hyper-technological warfare, human exploitation, and the risks posed by artificial intelligence. As an alternative, the author proposes "Techno-Humanism," a philosophy that combines technological progress with a deeper understanding of human values.
Did you read the latest on Cyber Hermetica?
Return next week for another schizotechnic rendezvous.
Nothing is a coincidence
I love the clarity of your message "We are all prostitutes in the “Creator Economy.” I would add that there are not two but three roles within that- Content Creators, "the algorithm that decides what to show to humans based on its own preferences", and then also the Content Consumers. We need to realize the great power in what we consume and I call that The Real Anti-fake Revolution. It is with regard to everything we consume- food, cosmetics, clothing, content, etc.