I think Bob has a point. It's when technology works we shold understand it, but when it doesn't work then we don't need to understand and can ignore it. That it doesn't work is rather the same as saying that we don't understand it, and that it works is the same as saying we understand it. Actually, whether something works or doesn't work is all fine, the problem is when it changes, that something that worked before stops to work, or something that was broken suddenly starts to work, boy, that's when we need understanding! When it comes to glitch the thing seems to be that it works when it doesn't work - but doesn't that also mean that it doesn't work when it works? If you make a working thing out of glitch, I don't know if it still is glitch - maybe it's pseudo-glitch? What is true glitch then? Like here, a faulty argument for instance, something that upsets the correct flow of logic or information - 'correct' meaning expected maybe. Currently we don't understand quantum mechanics properly, it doesn't mean it's a glitch, it's rather our understanding that must be considered a glitch - glitch understanding breaks reality - but is reality really broken?
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Pall Thayer <pallt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bob, > > As James points out, all's fine as long as technology works the way > it's supposed to. Then you don't need to understand how it works. > Glitch art breaks technology. > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:01 AM, <ja...@jwm-art.net> wrote: >> Haha but you might want to engage when for whatever reason your water supply >> ceases! We had a power cut yesterday and were reminded just how much we do >> that requires electric that we take for granted. Without the computer the >> obvious thing to do was to read a book but that's a little difficult in the >> dark! >> James >> >> Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: bob catchpole <bobcatchp...@yahoo.co.uk> >> Sender: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org >> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 08:27:03 >> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed >> creativity<netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> Reply-To: bob catchpole <bobcatchp...@yahoo.co.uk>, >> NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity >> <netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Can glitch art go public? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > > -- > ***************************** > Pall Thayer > artist > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org > ***************************** > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
