I'll propose a purely information-theory and somewhat mechanical
answer to this issue.
As the art is effected through the exposure to information (which will
hopefully fire some unused synapses and modify the future behaviour
of its customers,) the real change with the networked society is that
th
One reason for this is that in each "battle space", symbolic or real,
the stronger wants, well, to win. So if the increase of secrecy is
seen as empowerment, it's only natural that one will want opponents
(subjects) dis-empowered in that respect. Otherwise it would take all
the fun and profit from
If "empowerment" of the public by cheap self-publishing has demonstrated
anything, it is that a vast majority has nothing to say, lacks any detectable
talent and mimicks TV in publishing the void of own life (but unlike TV they
derive no income from commercials.)
So I wouldn't say that the classic
How is the credibility of the fiction of the government diluted by subjecting
one of its manifestations to the good will of a private corporation, whose only
motive for not flipping the switch off is accounts receivable?
Or is this just a start of the new strain of banana republics, Sweden being t
Finally, a promising theory that may explain why too much peace or too much war
is bad. For cognition-challenged, replace 'biofilm' with your favourite
organisational form, nettime included, and pick your own 'evolved cheats' ;-)
http://www.current-biology.com/content/article/abstract?uid=PIIS096
Thanx for the posting - interesting review.
However it seems to lack proper insight into what tools really are.
Creator's ideology gets projected into the tool, and then the Big
Disappointment comes, because the tool really doesn't give a fuck.
To put in more formal terms, creator C assesses the
Anything a program can "filter" another program can make "unfilterable".
The real value of nettime *is* bipedal-based filtering, especially by those not
turned into specialised data-processing contraptions.
So cheers to all those brain cycles burned to filter nettime (not nettame) and
their respe
That's what nettime is, a selective taz-scented flypaper with
imperfect glue, now and then one of these things get caught, you watch
them buzz about, and then they fly away. Weirder ones get hooked to it
and come back.
But it's the best show in the flytrap town, as the alternative is
watching heap
The difference between using computer and toilet roll insert is that there are
several multibillion dollar corporations between movement of the mouse and
something happening on the screen in the first case, and pretty much nothing
between manipulating inserts and affecting reality in the second.
I
> American industry has been bled dry and it's the industrial decline that
> above all explains the negligence of a nation confronted with a crisis
> situation:
All this euro-originated doomsday predictions fail to take into account two
things: europe (as in people that hold power) is strivin
> "distributor". If we conduct a bit of research, however, we clearly see
> that artists are far from being unanimous on this question. Many consider
BS.
Creator's position is extremely simple in this regard: any artist can, under
today's legal situation, provide his/her stuff for free. Some do,
> Anybody know if this is the first time Microsoft has "cooperated" with state
> authorities in this way? --dsw
'freedom' and 'democracy' are propaganda newspeak and have equivalent function
and
value as 'god' or 'allah'. As it is customary to remove such words that would
infringe on the local i
This is perhaps the most naive part of the otherwise very naive article:
> Foremost among them, is the whole discussion of domain names, and who
> should control them. Internet traffic is routed using IP addresses,
> similar to phone numbers on the telecom network. People came up with the
> clever
> Look. That is never going to work. I mean- right now you can download
> all of my music for free and no one does it. Upping the price to 5
> cents would mean that less zero people download my music. I would
It's not supposed to work. You don't understand the business model here.
Pro-free/dem
The main problem here is the assumption that copyright has much to do with
author, performer or artist. It is nominally attached to one, but its purpose
is to enable cashing in on the work, and there is a large number of people and
entities involved in that cashing in. The initial author gets just
> You have to use your imagination. Film viewers don't need support
> contracts, but they might like to have more of a say in the sorts of
> films that get produced, and they might be willing to pay for that. I
> certainly would.
The payment is the crucial problem for un-labelled content. Curren
It's just a phase in shortening of the attention span of the masses ...
eventually it will boil down to the single jingle, a single tone (2-3 notes for
the more classically educated ones.)
I mean, who is going to listen to the whole song?
Plan on starting sub-song indexing.
In the end, all there
> Most likely, Apple did this as a money-saving measure,
> with the whopping side benefit of limiting users'
> ability to, well, buy on the grey market. Shame,
> because that dual-power capability was one thing you
> could count on from Apple until now.
The cost of having two different versions to
> mv boss.class /dev/null
This is probably the best example of total zaelot incompetence and ignorance
which may provide a genetic excuse for fucking the working class (as if we need
any.) Stupidity is a crime.
You see, sounding geeky-cool is easy when the audience is composed of morons.
What th
--- noci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reality Turns real "Virtual" virtuality in Real-Time virtual bla!?
I hope the list is being archived for posterity. Must check if archive.org is
taking snapshots. We are reaching the end of era of the attention economy.
Before, whenever I thought that con-art
1. Who is "we" ? When I hear "we" I go for my gun (paraphrasing Goebbels.)
2. Does anyone really think that the technological evolution and it's
proponents give a fuck what proles think (or about 'desires' of 'users') ? All
I see here is conservative ludditism, defending some imaginary times (I'd
> But a part of me is also wondering if this isn't always the case; if the
> notion that political sovereignty functions through a permanent state of
> exception/emergency is simply a constitutive part of the way that 'the body
> politic' has been formulated since Plato (I was thinking of Plato'
> you'd be surprised how many people still believe that the right sex
> will *naturally* get you to subscribe to the right politics. see the
This is an amusing spin but just demonstrates the depth of denial.
My beef was with mental-masturbatory verbiage. It is irrelevant which model of
the real
Why do I have feeling that profiteers' greed, propagandists' exposes and the
like are on the higher universal ethical level than the drivel that appears on
nettime, the impotent pseudo-intellectual masturbation along the lines "they
are bad and we are good" and polluting the namespace with variatio
> any commercial software company would have done whose licenses had been
> breached), but for releasing the modified code in public. So I don't
> know what you take issue with?!
I take issue with a Good Cop principle. There is no such thing - if you want to
use so-called legal system and IP prop
> A gentle proposition given that the product was in breach with the GPL.
> Alternatively, the FSF could have asked to revoke all Linksys routers
> from the market and pay, say $10 compensation for each unit already
> sold. (In other words: $4M which could be used, for example, to pay
> Linus Torv
[syntax problem @ nettime -> resent by mod]
> An interesting thread. The real problem with the American educational
> system is that standards are not high enough. Public universities are
> packed with students who simply should not be in college. This policy
US (and many others') educational s
> no defined mechanism for acting as a corporate entity. who do you ask?
> all of them. what if some say yes, some say maybe, and some say no? well,
> that's what it is. (i'm not literally recounting our conversation.)
The moment nettime gets defineable in leadership/representative terms it wi
> the network, but by innovation at its edges. As end-user applications
> mature, they increasingly allow individuals to develop and share their
> own naming systemsnot to destroy the DNS, but to render it irrelevant.
Exactly. There are two sides to this.
First, the namespace has been conquere
--- ". __ ." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While I agree that we are so much "programmed" that it would be difficult
> at first to have to search for good music again. But people would adapt
> soon. And, let's be honest, there would soon be another, free alternative
> telling us what we have to lis
> So the only possible reply we, as people who read our email on.screen and
> do not let the secretary print them out, should somehow form an
> international lobbying organization to be a balancing factor against the
> interests of others in this matter...
Good ... I'd like to see a subcommitte
> However with open source it is more than likely - even perhaps inevitable
> - that that code *is* going to be scrutinised by people with the technical
> know-how to notice certain weaknesses or deliberate circumventions or
> backdoors. The same certainly cannot be said of closed source software
>
> alternatives seem much worse. Rather than bemoan the lack of development
> of "social-ties" currency, we really should be trying to figure out what
> this might look like and how it might work, with practical
> experimentation. It's partly a technical problem, but mostly a social
> problem -
The difference between "money" currency and "social-ties" currency is the
owner, or mint. The former is owned by the local force monopoly; the latter is
owned by the individual.
Modern technology offers something that would cause even greater panic than
providing sex services for "money" - self-mi
The (erronous) leap of faith happens when words on a rectangular screen and
"groups", "communities" etc. are taken seriously and for the face value.
It is so easy to do that, in the ornamented world of user interfaces, stylized
text and function buttons.
The real power gets so well disguised that
35 matches
Mail list logo
