Thanks Helen, You express a lot of my feelings and thoughts. Today I read an article by Regine Debatty "Using respiration to mine crypto-currencies" http://we-make-money-not-art.com/using-respiration-to-mine-crypto-currencies/ on an art piece by Max Dovey, who succeeds in my opinion to make the very complex and abstract blockchain into something I can think about. It puts it on a human scale.
"Turning lung exhalations into mining on the blockchain network not only hypothesizes that the body might one day play a more direct role in the financial systems but it also suggests that there might be more sustainable methods to maintain blockchains." I think you and some others might be interested. And so it also connects with Edward Picots apocalyptic videopoem The Great Project. I don't want to be quantified. Annie On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:35 PM, helen varley jamieson < he...@creative-catalyst.com> wrote: > hi everyone, > > i'm dropping in again for a moment (i haven't been able to keep up with > things because i'm very busy with this: http://www.magdalenamuenchen.de - > if any of you will be in or near munich during february, march & april next > year, please check out the programme & come along to something! & please > pass on to your theatre/performance/live-art friends & networks) > i had a big backlog of netbehaviour emails & have tried to read most of > it, but for sure i've missed many nuances in the discussion. for what it's > worth, here are some thoughts & comments: > > from ruth's summary email on 25.11.: > > Thor Karlsson presents Authenteq – a blockchain based identity platform > that is eminently sensible and useful in a “trustless” world of people who > want to rent things from others that they don't know, and move around > freely, free of intermediaries. This rings many alarm bells for a room of > artists, historians, sociologists and philosophers who value the ability to > slip between many identities. > > the idea of a blockchain based identity platform is pretty abhorrent to > me. as well as the social implications which are very problematic, fluidity > of identity is fundamental to theatre & to cyberformance. it's built in to > the design of UpStage - unlike most other platforms, one can be completely > anonymous & change identity at will. over 14 years we have never had a > problem with this, i think because the whole context is playful, deliberate > artiface, the shared suspension of disbelief that is inherent to theatre. > authenticity of action rather than individual personal authenticity is what > counts. > > why are we accepting that the world is "trustless"? sure some people are > untrustworthy, but this concept of trustlessness seems to have suddenly > taken hold as an undeniable fact. if it is so, then how can we respond to > that? is it possible to restore some degree of trust in the world? however > naive it may be, i want to strive for that. > > the logic of war and defence at the heart of cryptocultures > > yes - this is something that needs to be more discussed > > from rob's response to ruth: > > Or it may just be the case that high finance appropriates folk fintech as > high culture appropriates folk culture, > > absolutely agree > > from rob's responses to discussion about why bitcoin uses so much energy: > > It is not a waste of electricity, it is the cost of securing the network. > > but for whom? & at what cost to the planet, to the people, animals & > plants who derive absolutely no benefit from bitcoin? > > So once there are no more block rewards for mining, fees will still exist > and will become more important. > > so, it's all about a few people (cryptocurrency miners) making as much > money as possible; aren't miners are simply replacing the so-called > trustless third parties (banks, governments) that bitcoin is supposed to do > away with? > > re faircoin vs. decred: i didn't see anything about energy efficiency on > the decred website (maybe i missed it) & i find the whole governance thing > overwhelming. who has the time to read, understand & get involved with > this? my guess is, the same people who are developing the technology. so > even if its governance mission intends to be more cooperative, it still > comes down to a pretty small & unrepresentative group of people. > faircoin's reliance on third parties seems more realistic - we exist in > communities where we need to interact on a daily basis with all kinds of > third parties. sure, they can let us down, but this is how it's always > been. even bitcoin, decred & all the rest of them must rely on third party > actors (browser applications, for example). is being completely free of > third parties a realistic or even useful goal to have? > > h : ) > -- > helen varley jamieson > he...@creative-catalyst.com > http://www.creative-catalyst.com > http://www.upstage.org.nz > > *Magdalena München Saison 2018 <http://www.magdalenamuenchen.de>* > 2 Februar - 28 April 2018 > *Frauen - Theater - Performance* > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > >
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
