As to the point of how information is stored, this is very interesting. In my response above I indicate that all information is "information for", which is another way of saying that the notion of "exformation" vs. "information" is, while on the one hand pointing so something very important, also potentially misleading, particularly if we take the difference ontologically, rather than epistemologically. My sense of this is that any kind of communication or transfer of information from one complex system to another involves some kind of "translation". That is, steps are taken — the information is not directly passed between systems in an unmediated and direct way, but always operates through various channels appropriate to the system in question. In the case of human beings we are primarily talking about sensation, and therefore the activity of the astral body. Even face-to-face speech between humans is a far cry from "direct" — so much is involved in the process, and information can often be misconstrued, ahrimanized, taken abstractly, and so forth; we all have this experience. So what I'm saying is that in any situation where information is being transferred between systems, a process of reconstitution (it would be more accurate to say re-creation) necessarily takes place. This process is the manifestation of the activity of the system as a whole, and it is in just this activity where spiritual development can take us further. This means working to transform the astral body, i.e. the transformation of the sense life. Now, I agree with the general thrust of Prokofieff's stance, in that digital media and the mode of information transfer made possible by the internet does make a difference in this process, and that it is easier for ahrimanic forces to gain a foothold when these mediums are used. For this reason we should be more careful about how we use these technologies, because the "seductions of Ahriman" are greater in these realms, and it takes a correspondingly more developed human being to do the transformative work necessary to work towards a Michaelic impulse. But this is just my point; that greater spiritual work is asked of us precisely in this realm–not that the whole realm is irredeemable in principle. Like Prokofieff indicates from Steiner: we should be wary of "dualizing" — my sense is that it would be a mistake to consider this in terms of exformation vs. information, as if these two concepts are not actually quite interdependent and interwoven through and through. But at the same time you point to something profound, in that there is a real link between form and content. Some forms are less suitable for penetration by transformed human will than others, some forms do not carry content well. This is why I recommend working with Goethean observation; it is explicitly a method by which the way form and content are linked in complex systems becomes perceivable, thinkable, and actionable to human beings. It provides a development of spiritual capacities that increases our ability to 'redeem' what we involve ourselves with perceptively through our own activity. The transformation of our perception constitutes the basis for this redemption–it is my understanding that this is part and parcel of Michaelic schooling.

Basiclly you can't use a methodology of absraction (death forces) if you want to find something living
virtual reality equals compression equals death.
Svetlana

Did you write the above commentry 'A response to…." ? Are you Seth?

If so, my concern is that Prokofieff gave his question very carefully, supported by a specific methodology, in a particular context, and your response is completely out of this context. You mention esoteric information in your above commentry but there is no such thing as esoteric information, but there is esoteric knowledge learned in the context of living in a human community unmediated by machines.

Virtual reality is a contructed machine reality, not a created (organic) actuality that incorporates the whole universe (there is a very subtle difference) and in my opinion to imbue a machineic reality with love is a missunderstanding and misuse of the creative quality of the Christ-impuls. Humanities future is in co-creating the Christ/love stream and in this action we redeem others. The question of redemtion is a very deep mystery that can only be approached in a specific mood of soul. Steiner's lecture on the Knights Templar might be helpful to this question.

I appreciate your efforts, I only hope my feedback is helpful to you. If not just let it go, keep working
and good luck.
Svetlana