Cramer argues that the "post-digital" refers to a time when the "newness" of ubiquitous computing has been replaced with a critical interrogation of digital systems and an increased awareness of their pervasive influence. In this sense, he equates post-digital with postcolonialism: neither term refers to the end of anything but rather a kind of "mutation" of politics and power structures in relation to the continuation of AI (or colonization). Cramer identifies the post-digital as "post apocalyptic" in that the initial upheaval caused by the rise of machine intelligence is over and we are now in a period in which culture and politics exist in relation to this technology.
Cramer also makes a rather broad definition of what qualifies as "digital." For Cramer, anything that is divided into smaller, discrete units is "digital." The fretless neck of a violin would be "analog" by this definition, while a guitar neck would be "digital." An LCD screen would be a digital device, as it is divided into pixels, but (he claims) the light emitted by the screen would be analog. His point is to call into question popular notions of the "digital," and to argue instead that the "post-digital" has to do with a critical engagement with and reaction to embedded computing systems. Ultimately, Cramer sees these reactions are part of a desire for individual agency, which the "paradigm of 'system'" cannot deliver.