nettime-fr-raw reborning on anart.no
Hello! Friends, nettime-fr-raw just reborning on anart.no -right now! We thanks our friends of the North to receive us and we wish the list for the best to receive the largest circle of subscribers in a free perspecti= ve. Join us to write, offer to hear, or see, of yours, and forward and quote = all you want (but write the sources and the links). Take the media and hold i= t! It is not our revenge to nettime-fr, it is another else : specially unmoderate on any subject and discussions and with diverse and free opinions. For the most of us as French we are both subscribers of the two lists :) Have a happy new year dancing against the death and dancing against the w= ar (Andr=E9 Breton) All my best wishes to the babies just borning on earth this year and the last one. Singularly Ken's baby, Antoine's baby, Gallien's baby, and Frederic's baby -just yesterday! All my best to all, >From the part of Louise Desrenards Emergence | Arts / Words / Cultures & Sciences | R=E9sistances //__ __ __/___ .-.-.| |_| |_|__|..-.__.' _|..| | | -__|| _| _| ||| -__|__| _|| _|| |__|__|_||||__||__|__|__|_|//|__|//|__|/// International|__Francophone non exclusive__| / __/_ _// ///| __ \ _ | | | | /__/__/__/__/__| < | | | |__/__/__/__/__/__/__/_ |__|__|__|__|__|___|__|___|___||__|__|__|__|__|__|__|_ About the list http://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/nettime-fr-raw || Unmoderate (subscribers) || // Archives http://sympa.anart.no/sympa/arc/nettime-fr-raw # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: "GNU/Linux - Milestone on the Way to the GPL Society"
hello stefan, (in fact we'll meet in leipzig [germany] at the linxxnet.de event "copy kills (music kills) capitalism" in some days to talk about itmes like this. so, not as an attack, but for further information some short simple tops in front.) > There are indications that the labor society, and thus also exchange > as the basis of society have come to their historical end. Even if at > first sight this has the threatening appearance of a collapse > scenario, it does open up the possibility of a new society that > overcomes the deficits of the old one; i can not see, why labour in society comes to an - even historical - end; if you just take a look at the exploding labour-market in china (ibm sold their pc building business to Lenovo last december; my new Hoefner electric guitar "Shorty" comes from china, etc. etc.). in fact, the "historical end of labour" or the "final crisis of labour" is a thesis from the german Krisis-Group and Robert Kurz (certainly you've been studying it), who are ignoring (or what?) the facts of still existing and increasing material work-flows. > In the development of industrials societies for some decades now > there is already a tendency away from material production. The so > called service society is an expression of this. However, the societal > form was not able to separate itself from the industrial society. the development is never ever going away from material production: as we all know software (which does not exist, after friedrich kittler) is nothing without the hardware [the onto-problem], otherwise it would become pure idea (or "Ideal" in german; "eidos" in greek), and the 'service society' is still a social relation - of selling work for money, which is by the way not only "exchange" but a deal every worker is forced to. best matze schmidt # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
night of the living HTML purists [digest: recktenwald, cloninger]
Re: Re: Bill Thompson: Dump the World Wide Web Heiko Recktenwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Curt Cloninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 02:56:16 +0100 From: Heiko Recktenwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Re: Bill Thompson: Dump the World Wide Web Hi, 18:59 10.01.2005, Curt Cloninger wrote: >Here's an even earlier proclamation of the web's death. This >self-aggrandizing piece famously stirred the web design pot back in Well said, can somebody please explain what is so wonderfull and special with David Siegel? Downloaded one of his "Mindmappers" and coudnt fimd amything. H. >1997: >http://xml.coverpages.org/siegelRuined.html - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:53:43 -0500 From: Curt Cloninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Re: Bill Thompson: Dump the World Wide Web Hi Heiko, It seems like "wonkdom" is often conferred upon people who get in on something early and are able to speak from a consistent perspective. Siegel was making web sites that looked like this: http://www.dsiegel.com/home.html when everyone else's sites looked like this: http://www.dirtstyledesign.com Lots of web designers cut their teeth on his book back in 1996 because the only other how-to web design books at the time were HTML manuals. _ At 2:56 AM +0100 1/11/05, Heiko Recktenwald wrote: >Well said, can somebody please explain what is so wonderfull and >special with David Siegel? >Downloaded one of his "Mindmappers" and coudnt fimd amything. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: "non-commercial"? digest [stalder, geer]
>"How do you define commercial?" This has become my favorite thing to ask >at CC events, and I have yet to receive a straight-forward reply. Felix, why? Where are the problems? Commercial is something like an action, that is carried out in a commercial entity. The animus lucri faciendi is essential, to become rich or whatever. And we should make a difference between direct and indirect commercial activities. A direct commercial activitty would be Microsoft seeling Windows XP whatever, an indirect commercial activity would be IBM selling servers with Linux installed. The big problem still seems to be to understand that copyright is a good thing. GPL etc are an excercise of copyright, the copyright is still there. Other ideas like "giving away to the public domain", that is possible in germany now too, thanks to the revolutionary work of MPI etc, just makes life easier for big vendors. H. # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: Bill Thompson: Dump the World Wide Web
Hi Geert, Here's an even earlier proclamation of the web's death. This self-aggrandizing piece famously stirred the web design pot back in 1997: http://xml.coverpages.org/siegelRuined.html Written by David Siegel, "father" of presentational (vs. semantic) web design -- early advocate of table-based layouts, inventor of the single pixel transparent gif hack, author of *Creating Killer Web Sites* -- basically admitting that CSS promises to solve all the HTML limitations he originally had to fudge around. Now he's out of the game entirely: http://dsiegel.blogs.com/about.html Also applicable to the "Decade of Web Design" dialogue is this article I wrote in 2000 on the design vs. usability wars in the US: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/marsvenus/ peace, curt geert wrote: Yes, you are right. But what stroke me most is the very idea that one can, still, question the basic architecture and existence of WWW. One can say, that's naive, but it's also good news. The very fact that protocols are not God-given is not clear to most Internet users, I bet. The proposal that the WWW can be dumped, must come as a surprise as most of the technologies, once they are around for a number of years, sink down to some level of the collective subconcious. HTML might be a nightmare for designers, but who cares about them? Neither users nor Berners-Lee, so it seems. I posted the piece primarily because we're doing this Decade of Webdesign conference in a couple of weeks here in Amsterdam (www.decadeofwebdesign.org) where topics like this will discussed. Greetings, Geert # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: Working on article about the need for a progressive press in US
Ronda: Perhaps you might consider an alternative view . . . the Internet makes even propaganda-about-propaganda obsolete. Opinions can no longer be manipulated; people simply believe whatever the believe in and they are likely to act on these beliefs. Unlike radio which actually *was* propaganda (as psychological ground) or television which worried about the "dangers" of propaganda (as psychological figure), the Internet makes all of this seem . . . silly. Go ahead, launch a thousand (more) progressive media outlets and you will simply be adding to what the Internet has already accomplished -- reinforcing what those who run these sites already believe in and then acting on those beliefs. The problem you're going to run into is that many progressives still live in a "radio" era and still believe that propaganda is possible. Living in the past and thinking in this fashion is classically "reactionary." Happy New Year! Mark Stahlman New York City # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: Bill Thompson: Dump the World Wide Web
Florian Cramer wrote: > Geert, what interests me is why you posted this article. It seems to me > that you weren't necessarily thrilled by Thompson's technological vision, > but more by the apocalyptic rhetoric of doing away with the web, right? Yes, you are right. But what stroke me most is the very idea that one can, still, question the basic architecture and existence of WWW. One can say, that's naive, but it's also good news. The very fact that protocols are not God-given is not clear to most Internet users, I bet. The proposal that the WWW can be dumped, must come as a surprise as most of the technologies, once they are around for a number of years, sink down to some level of the collective subconcious. HTML might be a nightmare for designers, but who cares about them? Neither users nor Berners-Lee, so it seems. I posted the piece primarily because we're doing this Decade of Webdesign conference in a couple of weeks here in Amsterdam (www.decadeofwebdesign.org) where topics like this will discussed. Greetings, Geert # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
