a bigger system that makes it possible to write, read and communicate in Burmese on technological devices; it is a system that flows seamlessly until something does not, something goes wrong, the infrastructure is faulty. In this case, the break between the use of Zawgyi and Unicode is where the infrastructure collapses. Appel refers to philosopher Heidegger to explain how infrastructure can be distinguished as visible and invisible. Heidegger´s hammer is a tool to think with, differentiated by “ready-tohand” and “present-at-hand.” The hammer is a tool used in everyday life; something one simply is unaware until you need one. It is “ready-to-hand” when everything is in order, and you do not really think about it, it is invisible. The hammer becomes “present-at-hand” when something breaks or needs to be fixed; it is suddenly visible. They argue that the tool can be a “theory machine,” so when the hammer is visible, it is also visible to thought and science for theorizing the ubiquity of infrastructure (Appel, p. Introduction). I would suggest that the font issue reflects the ubiquity of the fonts as infrastructure; it is everywhere at once without always being recognizable. The battle between Zawgyi and Unicode can be compared to Heidegger´s Hammer. They were invisible until it became a problem of legibility and awareness arose. As with the accretion of infrastructure, the fonts coexist amidst a multiplicity of infrastructural forms and as such have both multiple and incomplete effects. Further, into this thesis the reader will recognize how this issue is somewhat present-at-hand without explicitly being talked about. This is an underlying issue or choice in every case of communication when a technological device is used. It is not something one needs to address every day, sometimes not at all, since something or someone else have made it ahead of time, and it works, so you use it. The screenshot (figure IV) is an example of how a typical Facebook post would look on my computer, which uses the Unicode-font. The first section in the post is written with Zawgyi and is more or less unreadable on my device. The second part is in English and the last one, Unicode. It is easy to see that Unicode is readable on my device, while Zawgyi is not. This is why most post with Zawgyi first would say “Unicode and English below”, so that people reading would scroll down and read the section their device can render adequately, or English if the person can understand it. On a device with Zawgyi installed it would have been the opposite, and Unicode would be unreadable on the device. 53