In the provided context, “ontology” refers to a way of asking what something is and how it exists, especially within digital, computational, and meta-creative settings. The term appears less as a formal philosophical definition and more as a framework for rethinking the status of artworks, systems, and entities in networked or generative environments. For example, cellular automata are described not as mere blinking points on a grid, but as part of a vast data flow in which energy, matter, and information self-organize. This shifts attention from static objects to processes, relations, and emergent structures.
The context also connects ontology to authorship and value. If creation is delegated to autonomous systems, questions arise about who counts as the author and where rights belong. In that sense, ontology is tied to the unstable status of digital works: they are not simply objects, but outcomes of systems, rules, and distributed agency. Another passage links Kevin Abosch’s practice to “the digital discourse of existence and value,” suggesting that ontology in this setting is also bound up with how digital works are evaluated and conceptualized.
The source material does not provide a full philosophical exposition of ontology. Based only on the passages given, it can be understood as a concept for describing existence in relation to computation, self-organization, authorship, and digital value.