Who's there?
          
          Is anybody there?
          
        I'm asking.
          Like deaf and stupid. I hear no knocking and I'm asking. I
          hear no
          noise and I'm asking. I hear no scratching at the door and I'm
          asking. Deaf and stupid. And blind. I'm looking behind the LCD
          monitor and I see nobody. NOBODY.
          
        WHO is there?
          
        What am I
          asking for? Is there any good reason to ask? Maybe I'm
          interested a
          little bit, just a little bit, who you are, but writing
          frankly this
          is absolutely unimportant, an information of no significance
          at all.
          You are who you are. You can't be anybody else no matter how
          much you
          try, no matter what masks you put on, no matter how you
          disguise, no
          matter what faces you make ...... You are what you are. You
          can't be
          what you are not. Well, you can be whatever and whoever you
          want. It
          really doesn't matter to me since you will leave no traces, no
          prints neither footprints, nor
            fingerprints, nor mindprints ..... at least
          traces and prints that I could notice easily without
          disturbing the
          secret live of my computer ..... So, it may happen all these
          concerns, foresights and explanations are useless and not
          necessary.
          They may turn out to be just nice and exciting theorizing of
          no
          practical value and impact. They may not. A theory having no
            practical value and impact does not exist. Practice is just
            another
            side of theory. While a theory is just the other side of
            practice. Or
            vice versa. Doesn't matter. Quarrelling and arguing which
            side is
            more important is a waste of time. A very little waste of
            time. Not
            worth paying attention to it. Not worth considering. This
            is not the
            truth. Nothing is a waste of time. One can always learn
            something.
          However, learning the identity of NOBODY would be a very
          exciting
          task, almost koanic but
            not cyclopeic. I think neither of
            clever Odysseus, nor of dull Polyphemus. They are not the
            point. . .
          . . . . . . It would be beautiful, just beautiful, imagine:
          you
          arrive, you stay, you leave and there is no trace left.
          Nothing. As
          if you have never been here. You were here and I think you
          were not.
          You are here and I think you are not. Somebody's here and I
          think
          nobody's here. That's nice. Oh, that's really nice: to be in a
          way
          nobody knows I am – to stay somewhere in a way nobody living
          there
          knows I am there. To live leaving no traces at all. Oh, what a
          dream!
          . . . . . With no doubt and at once the following question
          would be
          asked: is there any fucking reason to live that way? has is
          any sense
          to be in that way? Or this beautiful, subtle, the subtlest
          dream
          would be taken as the indisputable evidence of extremely
          profound,
          even thorough dehumanisation: what an inhuman and devastated
          existence this would be! What a sick and perverted ideal: the
          invisible in the non-existing state – paying nobody no
          compliments,
          harming and hurting nobody, never saying sorry because never
          acting
          the way saying sorry would be needed – that's a nightmare!
          that's a
          real nightmare!!! OK,
            let them cry – let them feel offended and
            indignant – let them keep offending and apologizing each
            other –
            birds must fly in air, fish must swim in water – that's the
            way
            they must live because the are built and programmed that way
            . . . .
            . .
          
          what can I
            see? what can I notice? I'm looking through the door open a
            crack and
            I shout loudly and boast that I can see the huge vast world
            around
            me
            
            
            would I know
            who you are if you said your name? then I would know only
            your name
            
            would I know
            who you are if you show me your picture? then I would know
            only your
            picture
            
            would I know
            who you are if I heard your voice? then I would only know
            your voice
            
            would I know
            who you are if I saw you? then I would only know your look
            
            would I know
            who you are if you told me the history of your life? then I
            would
            know only the history of your life
            
            and so on
            
            and knowing
            all these things and many more other thins I would know only
            your
            similarity, never your identity - I could only say who you
            are
            similar to - I could never say who you are identical to –
            because
            you are identical only to yourself and I would never know
            you
            entirely - I would always know only some parts of you while
            some
            other parts will always be missing
          
          
          Maybe I
          should ask: who are there? are there anybodies?
          
          Then I would
          hear the answer: no, there are nobodies.
          
          NOBODIES.
          
          Why there are
          no NOBODIES? Why NOBODY is always one and the only? If NOBODY
          is one
          and the only, IT (?) can not be similar to anybody. What
          means,
          paradoxically, IT has no identity. Isn't it strange that we
          use the
          word identity to
            indicate
          similarity? If
            somebody belongs to a group, he-she-it is similar to the
            other
            members of this group. Only similar, never identical. If I
            can speak
            about your national identity, then I mean that you are
            similar to the
            other members of this nation, so it would be more convenient
            and more
            proper to speak about national similarity.
            So, such national identity (and any other identity of that
            kind, any
            group identity) is a false identity, a fake identity because
            only a
            personal identity is true identity as the only possible one.
            Since
            NOBODY can not be similar to anybody because IT(?) is one
            and the
            only, there is no NOBODY nation. Or NOBODISH nation. Or
            NOBODESE? . .
            . . . . But because of that NOBODY can only be identical.
            NOBODY can
            only be identical only with NOBODY. Holy crap! What a messy
            thing is
            this identity! The more simple something is the more messy!
          
          
          But
          why I am the one who asks? Why you are not the one who is
          asking? Why
          aren't you asking? Even if we assume that a stranger is asked,
          that
          this is the right order (although we could quite easily assume
          that
          the reverse order is the right one – what has happened from
          time to
          time) we should indicate who is a stranger and who is a host,
          who is
          arriving, because this is not as clear as it seems to be.
          
          Well,
          you could knock at the
            screen? and ask: WHO's there?
          
          What
          would I answer then?