Paris suggests we realise that the ‘thing’ is now many different things. That’s interesting. I guess they are aren’t they, if we think of a thing as what use we make of it (by its relation to us), then once we realise it has a different relation to something else then it does sort of become another thing. But what if this is what things have been all along anyway? Is this then a world of lots of single things that are now multiple things, or are single things just things that have multiple relations (but it’s still just that thing…)?

Ren reckons they show the real cost of our media because of the resources they actually rely upon and require. For Stefan right now they encourage and teach us how to probe. That’s good. As should be clear if you come to uni to get trained for a job then you’ve confused trade school of university. You can to university to have your minds opened (or more importantly, to learn how to do this yourselves). Why? What ‘job’ do you want to be ‘trained’ for, and do you think that job will still exist in 10 years?

Monique picks up the detail in them, and how the way we dealt with the detail was to generalise. Often we need to generalise, and we do, but Monique’s point is good. For this task we want to unlearn generalisations and be very specific. Think about our thing as we like to think about ourselves – you don’t like to be described generically as, let’s see, Gen Y, privileged young adult who spends all your time looking at screens. Neither does your thing.