A digital garden conceptualizes personal knowledge curation as one of cultivation rather than following a particular format like a blog.

Rewilding is an ecological restoration concept that takes a hands-off approach to ecosystems. Applied to our natural environment, it has some flaws: “Wild,” according to what definition? Are there colonial fantasies about frontiers in this concept of wilderness? And is “hands-off” truly the best approach?

As someone who lives in California with wildfires caused by poor land stewardship and exclusion of indigenous knowledge from environmental response, I’m skeptical of “rewilding” in environmental science: it might just be a repackaging of colonial fallacies of humans being separable from nature.

But the digital is a different sphere. The enshittification of digital spheres forces us into workflows crafted by corporations whose priorities are capitalist profits, not humanity. You’ll void your warranty if you tinker with a device or try to break open the code of a proprietary app. You have to do things their way.

But this is fundamentally contrary to the nature of innovation and design.

The digital was supposed to be infinite. Endless possible environments. Endless possible ways to do things. Endless ways to link these together into a hypertextual web that exceeds the capacities of the natural world.

Yet, we’re focused on presentation. On things being properly curated. Polished enough to warrant being published online.

How limiting.

Digital rewilding allows for mental sprawl. For the incomplete and fragmentary nature of human thought to exist as-is. Each polished work only grew into itself from the myriad grounds that percolated into that work.

Aurei is the name of my secondary world. I envision it to be as lived-in as Discworld, but even larger in complexity and possibility.

These wilds are everything that go into the works you can read about Aurei.

They are stewarded, but they are not cultivated.

My brain is messy and wild.

Enjoy exploring it.