Is a sort of IF language? A language of Ifness? ie - the language of how to be an if? There could be other languages, of If and other stuff. Am currently "stuck"(??) with questions. A language of When? Currently it seems within the It seems, from stuff like: that the When could be done within an If.
However, on a 2nd wonder - or was it a thought? - a When feels, senses like it has its own Ifless, non-if dependancies as it focuses on time itself. When if? Indeed, now it seems there are other such languages, i seem to consider them infinities - each lingo, an infinity? However, here, to begin, pause, end or some-other from - am focusing on Ifs.

are these rules? -> Are they? Kinds of rules? Lets check: A person can: add elements (how) -> claim that they fancy having as the exchange element (which isn't there - not as an idea nor an element) say that they fancy stuff based on spaces and intervals or.. objects, etc. Do the same kind of ideas with different marks, etc. Also, am not sure these things Operate as rules to follow or constrain. How? A person might do any kind of linking, divergences, etc. and then its a simple question of if. If whatever was done? If what? Exactly. If whatever was done might require a what and still be linked to this, or perhaps have some other language or trajectory attached, etc. Isn't that a weak thinking? Maybe it is. Maybe it is weak in the sense that to be what and how it is, an If, it can not offer nor impose a constraint? As in, once an If has a constaints, its not an if? Gotcha! ;)

Is there a certain critique of technology via not-so-tech-wrapped
I don't really know.
Sometimes it seems like a critique of culture enamoured and defined by technologies. Perhaps by the desire for technbologies, in my mind..(LINKS)?? but i suspect there are other elements working in It seems like it might be linking or being spoilt by another practice that ShoulD focus on technology.
it might also live from the sensations eminating wonderings that go beyond the technological possible. the current possible and what's currently on offer.
As i type this, i think that present day technologies offer a lot of clear skies for artists to do stuff with bio-hacking, CRISP etc., with blockchains, AI and deep learning, smart contracts/daos, and some serverless p2p (some of which am engaged with). However, it seems to me that since much of technology is really, imho, particular aduptations of our thinking through language - I see no sense in sticking with whatever some technologists - with all respect - happened to come up with. Ted Nelson talks a fair bit about technological possible evolutions, Hertzog hints of similar notions in Lo and Behold. However, am talking here, I think, in radical terms, rather than critical wishes. The radical sense is that we can wonder and imagine, we can just go wild indeed - and since tools tend to follow, in time, the wonderments, such technologies will be developed, if and when there's a social call. That is another notion, evolution rather than enforcement. Sinbce current technologies are enforced via economical through to ideological means, it seems that a different way to imagine evolution and development offers an instant critique to how current tech oriented conventions operate. offers wondering to Be wondering, if a wonder is exactly that, an if wonder. An object one can evolve in various ways and is "realised" by the simple process of placing it shareably. A typed if wonder is the same as a scribbled one. Same as the typed a or number 2 are the same as the scribbled ones in so far that they may refer to same sensations. The sensations from wondering, sensations from Aness or 2ness, etc.. Indeed, allows, through sensations to provide more particulrities theur own universal and abstract concreteness, I think. So, for example, the difference between the scribbled wonderness and the typed one - that sensation which refers to the link with the digital and pen-paper materialities, can have its own sensations, right? (eg if wonder-paper-scribble-ness and if wonder-didital-typed-ness. both of which are different to wonder-on-dones-ness, and sao on.)