Check out the lore styleguide.
The Exodus and the Fracturing of the Net
At the height of the Fourth Corporate War, the long‑standing modernist narratives that had structured political economy, technology, and culture finally collapsed under their own weight. Universal claims about progress, efficiency, neutrality, and scale no longer aligned with lived reality. What followed was not a single revolution, but a fragmentation: societies, cultures, and communities splintered into postmodern formations that rejected totalizing stories in favor of situated meaning, plural truths, and self‑determined futures.
This period came to be known as the Exodus—not a singular departure, but a mass withdrawal from the Net as a unified, corporate‑governed space into a constellation of smaller, intentional worlds: the Nets.
The distinction that later historians would use to explain this transition was framed as Liminae versus Laminae.
Laminae described the smooth, layered, corporate Net: a continuous surface optimized for scale, extraction, and legibility. Laminae systems were designed to flatten difference, absorb dissent, and render all activity interoperable with capital. Identity, speech, knowledge, and social relations were laminated into standardized forms that could be indexed, monetized, and governed from above.
Liminae, by contrast, were threshold spaces. Derived from the plural of limen, they represented edges, crossings, and in‑between zones. Liminae were not optimized for scale, but for meaning. They were places where communities defined their own boundaries, values, and modes of participation. The Nets that emerged during the Exodus were liminal by design: partial, contextual, and intentionally incomplete.
The Exodus was the movement from Laminae into Liminae.
The primary catalyst for the Exodus was not technological, but social.
As modernist narratives collapsed, social groups fractured along lines of culture, identity, belief, and lived experience. Communities rejected the assumption that a single platform, discourse, or epistemology could represent everyone. Postmodern social formations—already present for decades—became dominant.
These groups did not fragment randomly. They reorganized around shared epistemes: common understandings of truth, value, harm, and obligation. Crucially, these epistemes were no longer negotiable within centralized systems that privileged neutrality and scale over context.
The Net could no longer contain them.
At its core, the Exodus was a struggle over epistemic power.
Corporate platforms had become the arbiters of truth by proxy: through algorithms, moderation systems, training data, ranking mechanisms, and economic incentives. What could be known, said, or seen was increasingly determined by firms whose incentives were incompatible with communal self‑definition.
Communities responded by exiting.
The Nets allowed groups to reclaim epistemic sovereignty—to define what counted as knowledge, evidence, expertise, and legitimacy within their own contexts. This was not consensus imposed from above, but coherence negotiated from within.
The Exodus did not occur spontaneously. It was guided.
Across disciplines and cultures, a technological priesthood emerged: engineers, librarians, maintainers, moderators, archivists, and organizers who understood both the failures of the Laminae and the affordances of liminal systems. Their role was not domination, but translation—helping communities migrate, construct, and sustain their own pocket universes.
These figures led people home to the Nets.
Drawing inspiration from earlier cyberpunk imaginaries, particularly the Idoru era of speculative fiction, the Nets were often described as walled cities.
But unlike earlier gated systems, these walls were built inward.
The Nets operated on inverted killfiles: no one was present by default. Participation was opt‑in, permissioned, and contextual. Presence was a gift, not an entitlement. This inversion marked a decisive break from the Laminae, where access was universal and exclusion reactive.
In the Nets, belonging preceded visibility.
A critical inversion defined this era: data structures followed social structures, not the other way around.
The fracturing of communities came first. Platforms, protocols, and data models followed. Hierarchies of communication reflected hierarchies of trust and decision‑making already present within communities. Networks became mirrors of social organization, rather than engines for reshaping it.
The myth that technical architecture determined social form finally collapsed.
As communities exited corporate systems, they abandoned enterprise software paradigms designed for firms rather than people.
In their place emerged post‑ERP ecosystems:
Each Net assembled its own toolkit, reflecting its values and needs. No two were identical, but patterns emerged—fractals rather than standards.
From a distance, the Exodus looked like collapse.
In retrospect, it was replication.
The Nets did not shatter the Net; they reproduced it at smaller scales, with intentional boundaries and self‑defined meaning. This fractalization preserved complexity while rejecting totality.
The Laminae failed because they demanded universality.
The Liminae endured because they accepted plurality.