An elite group of no more than 10-20 collectors have begun over the past 3-4 years to visit art fairs abroad, acquire works by international artists and attempt to position their collection beyond national borders.
Especially in recent years, as the real estate and the stock exchange boom had stopped, many turned to contemporary art for short-term or long-term investment. Quite a few of these buyers prefer direct contact to artists, making bulk purchases at heavy discounts in the studio. Aware of the risks of siding with contemporary art, they diversify their selections, and acquire groups of works that are difficult to bring on common denominator within a harmonious collection, yet guarantee a balanced future. [..] Strictly speaking these acquisitions make up no collections (if the latter is understood as a coherent entity), yet may become one by slimming down.
Lawyers and brokers, media figures and top managers seem to share a strong penchant for getting to know the person whose works they collect and for establishing a contact they often deem “friendly”. In my experience the artists share this “friendship” less enthusiastically, yet play the role happily for obvious reasons. [..] [Collectors] build up a network of artist acquaintances parallel to their private and business relations, and often spend increasing amounts of time in this new niche of their life. Collecting in this role is a medicine for the thirst of new human relations, often (seemingly) less rational than the world of business, and less conventional than the family circle. Without stretching the point, one may say that quite a few actors of the scene collect friends rather than art.
In the Western world normally unthinkable due to excessive prices, several Hungarian collectors have been able over the past two decades to amass Hungarian works spanning the whole of the 20th century.
In terms of media, painting predominates. Other traditional forms (graphics, sculpture) are much less popular, but their position is improving. Photography, new media, installation, object art, other ephemeral, site-specific, and mixed media works are still lagging behind, but likewise spreading. In recent years, the elite layer of collectors has definitely realised the importance of diversifying the media they collect.
The influence of galleries on collectors is also on the rise. In the first phase following the fall of the Wall, collectors were – for reasons lying at hand – very individualistic, often secretive in their approach, as well as financially stronger and faster than the young galleries. Most collectors were unwilling to pay a “gallery price”, and we can still find artists and buyers negotiating in a double prices system (where atelier prices grossly undercut the gallery price level), yet this is now receding.
Some collections tell immediately, at first look the decisive impact of the gallery standing behind them, while in other cases the collector retains the right of selection stronger, yet accepts the dictate of the market: purchases have to be carried out increasingly by way of a gallery. This motivates more and more artists to ally with galleries, which, in turn, forces a growing circle of collectors to frequent the galleries and art dealers. The system of collecting becomes more and more institutional in Hungary.
The sales made at the fair could just as well take place in the galleries at some other time; the fair exerts no clearly identifiable impact on collecting. International fairs, in contrast, have a rapidly growing effect on the Hungarian scene.
A surprisingly large number of new galleries (launched since 2000) have been quite successful in building up their clientele, and luring away buyers from senior galleries. Non-profit galleries have an increasingly important say in the game. As collectors become experienced, they realise that curators working at these institutions, and artists exhibiting there, often have prophetic power. What appears as a peripheral new phenomenon in the arts scene, perhaps in one of the non-profit “gate-keeper galleries”, may within a year or two have ascended to higher status.
Among the museums, the Ludwig Museum in Budapest takes a central position, yet its co-operation with collectors is brand new and still fairly weak, rather symbolic. Both the previous (founding) and the current director can be judged as mistrustful of private engagement in art, although in the past year or two there have been gestures of familiarising between the museum administration and private collectors. [..] Neither the Hungarian National Gallery nor the Municipal Gallery (the two other important public collections of modern and contemporary art in the capital) can boast closer ties with collectors. To put it bluntly, most collectors do not even know that both of these museums have a permanent exhibition of post-World War II art, and that their collections include some seminal works. In return, most curators and chief administrators working at these (and other) museums in Hungary are prone to similar ignorance.
Art magazines seldom provide food for thought to private collectors.
Although many [collectors] increasingly fear the “three evils” of publicity – the tax office, burglary and public envy – there is still regular coverage of art collecting by a few specialised art writers.
With a few exceptions (such as the Kassák Museum), larger public institutions rarely show private collections. For the Ludwig Museum, showing a private collection is entirely out of question. True, the international scope of this museum’s own collection has no peer among the private holdings in the country (with the sole exception of the Somlói–Spengler Collection, which attempts to catch up with international trends of collecting).
Over one hundred private collections of contemporary art in Hungary.
Collectors increasingly get to know each other. Recently a communication agency has set up a platform for their regular meetings, as well as a webs-site for interaction, while a few collectors go further and jointly fund art prizes, visits abroad and, vice versa, invitations of international art experts to Hungary.
Among the company collections, that of Raiffeisen Bank is the most solid, while among he company-funded prizes Strabag Award dominated the scene for over a decade, with the brand new Aviva Prize now poised for taking it over. In most corporate projects, however, the domination of the marketing aims can not be overlooked.
As elsewhere in the world, artists themselves are avid collectors in Hungary. Some of these collections (e.g. that of László Fehér, Tamás Konok, István Haraszty, Ákos Matzon) have become known through numerous exhibitions, yet there are dozens more. Most artists build their holdings by way of exchange, and this opens the way to international works, too, that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. A few artists (for instance Imre Bak) became known for that as early as in the 1970s, with museums borrowing foreign works from them; and it still holds that artist collectors are at the forefront of international collecting in the country.
Spurred by Dóra Maurer, the Open Structures Art Society (whose members range from István Nádler to Katalin Hetey) regularly stages exhibitions both in Hungary and abroad, based on their joint collection and documentation archive, which is an outstanding testimony of geometric creation in Hungary and the world over the past decades.
The Mobile MADI Museum is the collection of a group of artists.
The private holdings of Lóránd Hegyi or the late Éva Körner and Ottó Mezei are examples of collections put together by art historians, and the list goes on.
Those Hungarian artists who do have some recognition abroad (typically neo-conceptual mid-career figures, such as Róza El-Hassan, Attila Csörgő, or the Kis Varsó duo) are under-represented in Hungarian collections. In contrast, the most sought-after local artists (e.g. Imre Bukta, László feLugossy) have limited reference abroad.
!! Among the collectors, only those have a chance of making a name abroad who mix Hungarian positions with international art. Some of these people live abroad (e.g. Gábor Hunya in Vienna, András Szöllősi-Nagy in Paris), while recently a few businessmen based in Hungary have also begun buying internationally (e.g. László Gerő, Ferenc Karvalits, Béla Horváth). The taste of this narrow elite is similar to the choices of new collectors elsewhere in Eastern Europe: they try to lift their respective local artists onto a higher echelon of international recognition by buying blue-chip foreign artists from respected galleries.
Art collecting in Hungary
soft power
4.8.11
13:28 < barak> Soft power is the ability to obtain what one wants through co-option and attraction.
13:29 < barak> idea of attraction as a form of power dates back to ancient Chinese philosophers such as Laozi
in the 7th century BC. “Water is fluid, soft, and yielding. But water will wear away rock,
which is rigid and cannot yield. As a rule, whatever is fluid, soft, and yielding will overcome
whatever is rigid and hard. This is another paradox: what is soft is strong.”
13:29 < barak> hm pekna metafora pre silu zdielania a leakovania
13:30 < barak> uz mam dve akoze teorie ktore by sa hodili do btc pejpru – este protocollary power
13:31 < barak> via galloway
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/events/2011/20110504t1830vSZT.aspx via mirkoschaefer http://twitter.com/#!/mirkoschaefer/status/99070092112957440
+
The success of soft power heavily depends on the actor’s reputation within the international community, as well as the flow of information between actors.
Thus, soft power is often associated with the rise of globalization and neoliberal international relations theory.
Popular culture and media is regularly identified as a source of soft power, as is the spread of a national language,
or a particular set of normative structures;
a nation with a large amount of soft power and the good will that engenders it inspire others to acculturate,
avoiding the need for expensive hard power expenditures.
/
The Soviet Union had a great deal of soft power in the years after World War II, but they destroyed it by the way they used their
hard power against Hungary and Czechoslovakia, just as American military actions in the Middle East undercut their Soft Power.
Irrational Modernism
the picture (c. 1916-1917) shows Duchamp “exhausted after an evening that likely involved some form of excessive consumption”;
he recalls Duchamp’s artist-friend (and, before he went to the front, fellow expatri-
ate) Albert Gleizes’s criticism of Duchamp for such habits, and Duchamp’s response:
“if I didn’t drink so much alcohol, I would have committed suicide long ago!”
+
Dreier’s deeply repressed sexual fantasizing and frustration in relation to Duchamp.
Duchamp was highly seductive to the women of the New York Dada circle and frustratingly un-
available to most of them, in particular Dreier.
While she gave him money to support him, this older German woman was clearly not Duchamp’s type.
Their personal correspondence shows a frustrated sexuality turned maternalism on Dreier’s
part, a polite and gentle distance maintained on Duchamp’s.
+
Duchamp liked to proclaim that he
considered himself an engineer rather than an artist.46 The gesture of the readymades
highlighted his confusion of the boundaries between engineering (the making of
machines) and art, but this gesture is also tinged with what we might call a machine-
age primitivism.
+
Léger in the 1950s told the story of going, before World War I, to an airplane exhibi-
tion with Duchamp and Brancusi: “Marcel . . . walked around the motors and pro-
pellers without saying a word. Suddenly he turned to Brancusi: ‘Painting has come to
an end. Who can do anything better than this propeller? Can you?’ ”
+
his readymade gesture thus explicitly reverses the dynamic at play in the
Ford system: while the assembly line functions specifically to take the individual prod-
uct away from the individual worker (in what Marx noted to be an alienation of the
laborer from his products), Duchamp’s gesture is to return individuality to the massproduced object
/ ??? return individuality to… ? dnes: massproduced object: affection, relations, life
/ back to individual life (toho je plne contemp art), aj ostatne veci, toho je vela… to je malo.
/ vtedajsia machine je dnes internet/softver
Roubini-Bremmer (2011) on crisis of global multilateralism
Brian Holmes
Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:00:18 -0800
< barak> zaujimave.. z kosiara sucasnej geopolitiky.. aj ad arab spring..
01:53 < barak> tvrdia ze ziadna velmoc sa nechce uchopit role globalneho policajta lebo je dost bizi sama so sebou, co globalizacia standardizovala sa zacne pomaly rozpadat, a staty zacnu viac chranit vlastne trhy protekcionizmom
/ !!!! “global public goods” (mostly security, a sordid boon) !!!???
/ spinava dobrocinnost (OLPC?), alebo co tym mysli?
Ian Bremmer and Nouriel Roubini
/ 8 ben IV sc & 4 men V ar 59
Last month we had a strong debate on Nettime about the nature and
meaning of the Arab Spring. The nature of it is up to the participants
to say, but in my view the fall of authoritarian regimes in North Africa
represents at least a partial collapse of one of the pillars on which
the transnational state-form of the present was founded, way back in the
late seventies-early eighties when Trilaterlaism (or “Triad Power”)
first got off the ground, on the backs of workers in the Arab world, in
Latin America, and then increasingly in China. Now the rise of the BRIC
countries and the development of the Gulf has entirely overtaken that
old hegemony.
In this paper by Nouriel Roubini and his wunderkind sidekick Ian
Bremmer, the ineffectiveness of the present G-20 becomes the signal of
chaos in the world system. Far from an abstract fancy hatched among the
students of Immanuel Wallerstein, world hegemony is a daily concern of
the corporate classes because of its provision of so-called “global
public goods” (mostly security, a sordid boon). Roubini and Bremmer
don’t see anyone delivering the goods in the near future.
I’m sending the article because it nails the central point on which my
analysis of the Arab Spring is based: the collapse of the Trilateral
system that was perfectly represented by the members of the G-7.
However, the paper was written before the events in Egypt and anyway,
it’s not certain these guys can look beyond the sagging values of
economic growth. What I see in the future is a wide-open world where
everyone can make a difference amidst the most unexpected circumstances.
For the moment at least this is an incredibly light period, a time for
escaping gravity. It’s a time for invention. Learn some new moves in a
zero-G world.
ciao, BH
***
Foreign Affairs, January 31, 2011
“A G-Zero World”
The New Economic Club Will Produce Conflict, Not Cooperation
Ian Bremmer and Nouriel Roubini
This is not a G-20 world. Over the past several months, the expanded
group of leading economies has gone from a would-be concert of nations
to a cacophony of competing voices as the urgency of the financial
crisis has waned and the diversity of political and economic values
within the group has asserted itself. Nor is there a viable G-2 — a
U.S.-Chinese solution for pressing transnational problems — because
Beijing has no interest in accepting the burdens that come with
international leadership. Nor is there a G-3 alternative, a grouping of
the United States, Europe, and Japan that might ride to the rescue.
Today, the United States lacks the resources to continue as the primary
provider of global public goods. Europe is fully occupied for the moment
with saving the eurozone. Japan is likewise tied down with complex
political and economic problems at home. None of these powers’
governments has the time, resources, or domestic political capital
needed for a new bout of international heavy lifting. Meanwhile, there
are no credible answers to transnational challenges without the direct
involvement of emerging powers such as Brazil, China, and India. Yet
these countries are far too focused on domestic development to welcome
the burdens that come with new responsibilities abroad.
We are now living in a G-Zero world, one in which no single country or
bloc of countries has the political and economic leverage — or the will
— to drive a truly international agenda. The result will be intensified
conflict on the international stage over vitally important issues, such
as international macroeconomic coordination, financial regulatory
reform, trade policy, and climate change. This new order has
far-reaching implications for the global economy, as companies around
the world sit on enormous stockpiles of cash, waiting for the current
era of political and economic uncertainty to pass. Many of them can
expect an extended wait.
THE OLD BOYS’ CLUB
Until the mid-1990s, the G-7 was the international bargaining table of
greatest importance. Its members shared a common set of values and a
faith that democracy and market-driven capitalism were the systems most
likely to generate lasting peace and prosperity.
In 1997, the U.S.-dominated G-7 became the U.S.-dominated G-8, as U.S.
and European policymakers pulled Russia into the club. This change did
not reflect a shift in the world’s balance of power. It was simply an
effort to bolster Russia’s fragile democracy and help prevent the
country from sliding back into communism or nationalist militarism. The
transition from the G-7 to the G-8 did not challenge assumptions about
the virtues of representative government or the dangers of extensive
state management of economic growth.
The recent financial crisis and global market meltdown have sent a much
larger shock wave through the international system than anything that
followed the collapse of the Soviet bloc. In September 2008, fears that
the global economy stood on the brink of catastrophe hastened the
inevitable transition to the G-20, an organization that includes the
world’s largest and most important emerging-market states. The first
gatherings of the club — in Washington in November 2008 and London in
April 2009 — produced an agreement on joint monetary and fiscal
expansion,increased funding for the International Monetary Fund (IMF),
and new rules for financial institutions. These successes came mainly
because all the members felt threatened by the same plagues at the same
time.
But as the economic recovery began, the sense of crisis abated in some
countries. It became clear that China and other large developing
economies had suffered less damage and would recover faster than the
world’s wealthiest countries. Chinese and Indian banks had been less
exposed than Western ones to the contagion effects from the meltdown of
U.S. and European banks. Moreover, China’s foreign reserves had
protected its government and banks from the liquidity panic that took
hold in the West. Beijing’s ability to direct state spending toward
infrastructure projects quickly generated new jobs, easing fears that
the decline in U.S. and European consumer demand might trigger
large-scale unemployment and civil unrest in China.
As China and other emerging countries rebounded, the West’s fear and
frustration grew more intense. In the United States, stubbornly high
unemployment and fears of a double-dip recession fueled a rise in
antigovernment activism and shifted power to the Republicans.
Governments fell out of favor in France and Germany — and lost
elections in Japan and the United Kingdom. Fiscal crises provoked
intense public anger from Greece to Ireland and the Baltic states to Spain.
Meanwhile, Brazil, China, India, Turkey, and other developing countries
moved forward as the developed world remained stuck in an anemic
recovery. (Ironically, the only major developing country that has
struggled to recover is the petrostate Russia, the first state welcomed
into the G-7 club.) As the wealthy and the developing states’ needs and
interests began to diverge, the G-20 and other international
institutions lost the sense of urgency they needed to produce
coordinated and coherent multilateral policy responses.
Politicians in Western countries, battered by criticism that they have
failed to produce a robust recovery, have blamed scapegoats overseas.
U.S.-Chinese political tensions have risen significantly over the past
several months. China continues to defy calls from Washington to allow
the value of its currency to rise substantially. Policymakers in Beijing
insist that they must protect their country during a delicate moment in
its development, as lawmakers in Washington become more serious about
taking action against Chinese trade and currency policies that they say
are unfair. In the past three years, there has been a sharp spike in the
number of domestic trade and World Trade Organization cases that China
and the United States have filed against each other. Meanwhile, the G-20
has gone froma modestly effective international institution to an active
arena of conflict.
THE EMPTY DRIVER’S SEAT
There is nothing new about this bickering and inaction. Four decades
after the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, for example, the major powers
still have not agreed on how to build and maintain an effective
nonproliferation regime that can halt the spread of the world’s most
dangerous weapons and technologies. In fact, global defense policy has
always been essentially a zero-sum game, as one country or bloc of
countries works to maximize its defense capabilities in ways that
(deliberately or indirectly) challenge the military preeminence of its
rivals.
International commerce is a different game; trade can benefit all
players. But the divergence of economic interests in the wake of the
financial crisis has undermined global economic cooperation, throwing a
wrench into the gears of globalization. In the past, the global economy
has relied on a hegemon — the United Kingdom in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries and the United States in the twentieth century —
to create the security framework necessary for free markets, free trade,
and capital mobility. But the combination of Washington’s declining
international clout, on the one hand, and sharp policy disagreements, on
the other — both between developed and developing states and between
the United States and Europe — has created a vacuum of international
leadership just at the moment when it is most needed.
For the past 20 years, whatever their differences on security issues,
governments of the world’s major developed and developing states have
had common economic goals. The growth of China and India provided
Western consumers with access to the world’s fastest-growing markets and
helped U.S. and European policymakers manage inflation through the
import of inexpensively produced goods and services. The United States,
Europe, and Japan have helped developing economies create jobs by buying
huge volumes of their exports and by maintaining relative stability in
international politics.
But for the next 20 years, negotiations on economic and trade issues are
likely to be driven by competition just as much as recent debates over
nuclear nonproliferation and climate change have. The Doha Round is as
dead as the dodo, and the World Trade Organization cannot manage the
surge of protectionist pressures that has emerged with the global slowdown.
Conflicts over trade liberalization have recently pitted the United
States, the European Union, Brazil, China, India, and other emerging
economies against one another as each government looks to protect its
own workers and industries,often at the expense of outsiders. Officials
in many European countries have complained that Ireland’s corporate tax
rate is too low and last year pushed the Irish government to accept a
bailout it needed but did not want. German voters are grousing about the
need to bail out poorer European countries, and the citizens of southern
European nations are attacking their governments’ unwillingness to
continue spending beyond their means.
Before last November’s G-20 summit in Seoul, Brazilian and Indian
officials joined their U.S. and European counterparts to complain that
China manipulates the value of its currency. Yet when the Americans
raised the issue during the forum itself, Brazil’s finance minister
complained that the U.S. policy of “quantitative easing” amounted to
much the same unfair practice, and Germany’s foreign minister described
U.S. policy as “clueless.”
Other intractable disagreements include debates over subsidies for
farmers in the United States and Europe, the protection of intellectual
property rights, and the imposition of antidumping measures and
countervailing duties. Concerns over the behavior of sovereign wealth
funds have restricted the ability of some of them to take controlling
positions in Western companies, particularly in the United States. And
China’s rush to lock down reliable long-term access to natural resources
— which has led Beijing to aggressively buy commodities in Africa,
Latin America, and other emerging markets — is further stoking conflict
with Washington.
Asset and financial protectionism are on the rise, too. A Chinese
state-owned oil company attempted to purchase the U.S. energy firm
Unocal in 2005, and a year later, the state-owned Dubai Ports World
tried to purchase a company that would allow it to operate several U.S.
ports: both ignited a political furor in Washington. This was simply the
precursor to similar acts of investment protectionism in Europe and
Asia. In fact, there are few established international guidelines for
foreign direct investment — defining what qualifies as “critical
infrastructure,” for example — and this is precisely the sort of
politically charged problem that will not be addressed successfully
anytime soon on the international stage.
The most important source of international conflict may well come from
debates over how best to ensure that an international economic meltdown
never happens again. Future global monetary and financial stability will
require much greater international coordination on the regulation and
supervision of the financial system. Eventually, they may even require a
global super-regulator, given that capital is mobile while regulatory
policies remain national. But disagreements on these issues run deep.
The governments of many developing countries fear that the creation of
tighter international rules for financial firms would bind them more
tightly to the financial systems of the very Western economies that they
blame for creating the recent crisis. And there are significant
disagreements even among advanced economies on how to reform the system
of regulation and supervision of financial institutions.
Global trade imbalances remain wide and are getting even wider,
increasing the risk of currency wars — not only between the United
States and China but also among other emerging economies. There is
nothing new about these sorts of disagreements. But the still fragile
state of the global economy makes the need to resolve them much more
urgent, and the vacuum of international leadership will make their
resolution profoundly difficult to achieve.
WHO NEEDS TO DOLLAR?
Following previous crises in emerging markets, such as the Asian
financial meltdown of the late 1990s, policy makers in those economies
committed themselves to maintaining weak currencies, running current
account surpluses, and self-insuring against liquidity runs by
accumulating huge foreign exchange reserves. This strategy grew in part
from a mistrust that the IMF could be counted on to act as the lender of
last resort. Deficit countries, such as the United States, see such
accumulations of reserves as a form of trade mercantilism that prevents
undervalued currencies from appreciating. Emerging-market economies, in
turn, complain that U.S. fiscal and current account deficits could
eventually cause the collapse of the U.S. dollar, even as these deficits
help build up the dollar assets demanded by those countries accumulating
reserves. This is a rerun of the old Triffin dilemma, an economic
observation of what happens when the country that produces the reserve
currency must run deficits to provide international liquidity,deficits
that eventually debase the currency’s value as a stable international
reserve.
Meanwhile, debates over alternatives to the U.S. dollar, including that
of giving a greater role to Special Drawing Rights (an international
reserve asset based on a basket of five national currencies created by
the IMF to supplement gold and dollar reserves), as China has
recommended, are going nowhere, largely because Washington has no
interest in any move that would undermine the central role of the
dollar. Nor is it likely that China’s yuan will soon supplant the dollar
as a major reserve currency, because for the yuan to do so, Beijing
would have to allow its exchange rate to fluctuate, reduce its controls
on capital inflows and outflows, liberalize its domestic capital
markets, and create markets for yuan-denominated debt. That is a
long-term process that would present many near-term threats to China’s
political and economic stability.
In addition, energy producers are resisting policies aimed at
stabilizing price volatility through a more flexible energy supply.
Meanwhile, net energy exporters, especially Russia, continue to use
threats to halt the flow of gas as a primary foreign policy weapon
against neighboring states. Net energy consumers, for their part, are
resisting policies, such as carbon taxes, that would reduce their
dependency on fossil fuels. Similar tensions derive from the sharply
rising prices of food and other commodities. Conflicts over these issues
come at a time when economic anxiety is high and no single country or
bloc of countries has the clout to help drive a truly international
approach to resolving them.
From 1945 until 1990, the global balance of power was defined primarily
by relative differences in military capability. It was not market-moving
innovation or cultural dynamism that bolstered the Soviet bloc’s
prominence within a bipolar international system. It was raw military
power. Today, it is the centrality of China and other emerging powers to
the future of the global economy, not the numbers of their citizens
under arms or the weapons at their disposal, that make their choices
crucial for the United States’ future.
This is the core of the G-Zero dilemma. The phrase “collective security”
conjures up NATO and its importance for peace and prosperity across
Europe. But as the eurozone crisis vividly demonstrates, there is no
collective economic security in a globalized economy. Whereas Europe’s
interest rates once converged based on the assumption that southern
European countries were immune to default risks and eastern European
states were lined up to join the euro, now there is fear of a contagion
within the walls that might one day bring down the entire eurozone
enterprise.
Beyond Europe, those who make policy, whether in a market-based
democracy such as the United States or an authoritarian capitalist state
such as China, must worry first and foremost about growth and jobs at
home. Ambitions to bolster the global economy are a distant second.
There is no longer a Washington consensus, but nor will there ever be a
Beijing consensus, because Chinese-style state capitalism is designed to
meet China’s unique needs. It is that rare product that China has no
interest in exporting.
Indeed, because each government must work to build domestic security and
prosperity to fit its own unique political, economic, geographic,
cultural, and historical circumstances, state capitalism is a system
that must be unique to every country that practices it. This is why,
despite pledges recorded in G-20 communiqués to “avoid the mistakes of
the past,” protectionism is alive and well. It is why the process of
creating a new international financial architecture is unlikely to
create a structure that complies with any credible building code. And it
is why the G-Zero era is more likely to produce protracted conflict than
anything resembling a new Bretton Woods.
speculative realism (2011)
lepsie v http://www.burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/d/d5/Speculative-realism.txt
SPECULATIVE REALISTS [najma via wikipedia] (2 jan 11)
defines itself loosely in its stance of metaphysical realism against the dominant forms of post-Kantian philosophy or what it terms correlationism (~ anthropocentrism?).
conf
I 4/2007 @ Goldsmiths College, org by Alberto Toscano, *spec real
II 4/2009 “Speculative Realism/Speculative Materialism” @ UWE Bristol
publishing
Collapse #3 (publ conf I by CCRU Warwick), (wordpress) blogs, Zero Books, Re.Press, Open Humanities Press
Quentin Meillassoux, 67 fr/paris, son of anthropologist, teaches @ École Normale Supérieure, former student of Badiou (po nom prebral tiez matematicke referencie).
materialista, nie realista.
Badiou o jeho 06/08 knihe After Finitude (EN transl by Brassier) hovori ze uvadza do filozofie uplne novy pohlad, iny ako tri Kantove – kritiku, skepticizmus a dogmatizmus;
kritizuje ‘correlationism’ ~ filozofia moze pojednavat cisto o human-world (cosi ako antropocentrizmus, ale neviem preco nepouziva ten pojem).
‘arche-fossil’
‘absolute time’
hlasi(l) sa k ‘speculative materialism’.
pre-human-world = ‘ancestral realm’.
primarne vlastnosti veci dosahuje matematika, vnimanie az sekundarne vlastnosti.
[core] agnosticky skepticizmus voci kauzalite treba premenit v istotu ze causal necessity je uplna blbost… a nutnost ze laws or nature are contingent.
odmieta Kantovu Kopernikovsku revoluciu (svet zavisi od situacie pozorovatela) – vytvoril len Ptolemaiovsku kontra-revoluciu.
/ nebloguje?
Graham Harman – 68 ta 8 imix II us/iowa city, studoval pod Alphonsom Lingisom na Penn State Uni (MA 91), PhD 99 na DePaul Uni Chicago (hih zivil sa ako sports writer), 00- American University in Cairo
metafyzik, realista, occasionalist (occasional cause), silne sympatizuje s panpsychizmom, snazi sa zvratit lingvisticky obrat v zap. filozofii.
‘object-oriented philosophy’ (tiez Bryant a Bogost) via tool-analysis Heideggerovej Being and Time – fenomenologia trpi tym ze vsetko vztahuje na cloveka, PRO utlaceny realny zivot objektov (tymi je EM pole, ohnuty casopriestor, aj OSN).
‘tool-being’
‘vicarious causation’
‘allure’
robi rozdiel medzi realnymi a vnimanymi objektami – na rozdiel od (early?) Latour (& DeLanda?)’s flat ontology (mam to rozvite na poznamkach z pripravy PZI eseje 1).
Ray Brassier, 65, fr-skotski predkovia, Middlesex University => American University of Beirut
nihilista, realista, materialista, antihumanista.
stavia na ‘non-philosophy’ Françoisa Laurella.
premostuje povojnovu FR filozofiu s anglo-us tradicie fil. naturalizmu, kogn. vedy, a neurofilozofie.
‘transcendental nihilism / methodological naturalism’
prelozil 2 Badiouove a 1 Meillassouxove knihy.
Iain Hamilton Grant – BA Reading, MA, PhD Warwick, University of the West of England Bristol
‘transcendental materialism / neo-vitalism’
! venuje sa aj hist & phil of sci, phil of tech.
prelozil par knih Baudrillarda a Lyotarda.
breaktru 06 knihou Philosophies of Nature After Schelling (myslim ze Schelling zasadne spomina Ranciere pri aesthetical regime),
kde kritizuje filozofov snaziacich sa reverznut Platona – mali by radsej reverznut Kanta.
tiez dost kritizuje fil etiky a zivota v sucasnej kontinentalnej fil – ze davaju moc do popredia cloveka.
hlavny source: Plato & Schelling & Deleuze. anti Aristotle & Kant (realitu redukuju na ludsky pohlad).
+
Levi Bryant
Nick Srnicek
Ian Bogost
..
SPECULATIVE TURN reader (re.press 1/2011)
editori sa nikdy nestretli osobne (:
Intro [CORE] ***
quick hist of phil 1900s-2000s:
Heidegger & phenomenology; Derrida & Foucault (od late 70s); Deleuze (od smrti v mid-90s); Zizek a neskor aj Badiou (po smrti Derridu v 04);
tiez Latour (via OO ontologists Harman, Bryant, Bogost); Stengers (on Deleuze & Whitehead); Laruelle (non-philosophy, incl. cogn sci & neurophil);
v 02 DeLanda a Harman publikuju o realizme (Intensive Science & Tool-Being); mid-00s Meillassoux (After Finitude); SpecReal eventy 07 a 09
anti-realist trends @ phil incl. phenomenology, structuralism, post-structuralism, deconstruction, postmodernism.
teraz vid eko katastrofa alebo infiltration of tech into everyday (incl. bodies) – antirealizmus je neudrzatelny.
doteraz najma focus on texts, discourse, social practices, and human finitude — spec real na realitu ako taku.
SR vsetci uvazuju o realite inak ako cez myslenie a ludskost (napr textovu kritiku) – napr cez noumenal objects, causality-in-itself, neurovedu, matematicke absolutes, psychoanalyzu.
Speculation aims at something ‘beyond’ the critical and linguistic turns.
anti-realism found itself in trap of ‘correlationism’: ‘the idea according to which we only ever have access to the correlation between thinking and being, and never to either term considered apart from the other’.
povod v Kantovej kritickej filozofii (Kopernikovska revolucia: it is no longer the mind that conforms to objects, but rather objects that conform to the mind)
javy: preoccupation with such issues as death and
finitude, an aversion to science, a focus on language, culture, and subjectivity to the
detriment of material factors, an anthropocentric stance towards nature, a relinquish-
ing of the search for absolutes, and an acquiescence to the specific conditions of our historical thrownness. [p 4]
Zizek draws on the naturephilosophy of Schelling, the ontological vastness of Hegel, and the insights into the Real of Lacan.
@Parallax View 06:
??? ‘Materialism means that the reality I see is never “whole”—not because a large part of it eludes me, but be-
cause it contains a stain, a blind spot, which indicates my inclusion in it’.
Reality, he repeatedly states, is non-All; there is a gap, a stain, an irresolvable hole within reality
itself. The very difference between the for-itself and the in-itself is encompassed with-
in the Absolute. Only by attending to this gap can we become truly materialist. Žižek
has signalled a ‘transcendental materialist’ turn within recent continental thinking.
Badiou: ‘mathematics = ontology’ (@ Being and Event 05-EN), stavia ontologiu na teorii mnozin. matematika hovori o byti bez predikacii
Latour: ‘irreductionism’ – all entities are equally real (though not equally strong) insofar as they act on other entities.
Cybernetic Culture Research Unit, *late 90s, Sadie Plant & Nick Land @ Uni of Warwick, tiez Matthew Fuller, Kode 9, Kodwo Eshun, Mark Fisher.
coskoro presunuli mimo uni. publikuju Collapse (*9/06) a Pli – liahen fil realizmu a materializmu.
approved blogs (discussing/producing SR): Bryant (Larval Subjects), Srnicek (The Accursed Share and Speculative Heresy), Harman (Object-Oriented Philosophy), Another Heidegger Blog, Eliminative Culinarism, Immanence, Infinite Thought, Jon Cogburn’s Blog, K-Punk, Naught Thought, The Pinocchio Theory, Planomenology, Poetix, Rough Theory, and Splintering Bone Ashes.
sections (cmr = continental materialism and realism)
0 badiou uvadza socreal – chyba im th of ‘event’
1 spec realist conf 2
2 responses to ‘after finitude’
3 cmr and politics
4 new phil trends in metaphysics
5 cmr and science
@ part 1 – Grant [core] – ‘Does Nature Stay What It Is?’
kritizuje ‘materializmus’ Badioua a Zizeka (on cerpa z dynamist concept of matter & formal rather than material problem of Ground by Hindrichs);
a neo-Fichteanism kontinentalneho myslenia (napr Meillassoux, Zizek)
predtym Harman kritizuje G ze ‘podkopava’ objekty tym ze v nich hlada hlbsie materialne zaklady (Boha, fyzicke vlastnosti, pudy, predindividualno);
G na to: Harman is incapable of grasping the anteriority upon which both ideation and objects depend.
+
PSR = ?; by Leibniz
Ground = ?
kritizuje Newtonovsky dualizmus atomov a sil (ten vidno aj u ‘grounded’ power theorists @ phil of nature) ktory naraza pri metafyzike hmoty,
a konkretne pri koncepcii inertnej underlying substance.
cize chapu hmotu ako Aristoteles chape substanciu. z toho dualizmus (@ ontology of eliminative materialism), pritomny aj na SpecReal 2007 conf.
materializmus treba chapat ako ontologicku tezu – potom je vsetko materialne.
Hindrichs provides a functionalist model of the operation of grounding, which amounts to asserting the equivalence of ground, act and form.
conceptions of matter:
– substance
– dynamist – introduced into physics by Hans Christian Oersted in 1820 (@ exp demo of EM), but into philosophy by Plato.
[moc tazke, precitam neskor, vyzera byt zasadne]
@ part 2
Meillassouxovi zmietli nesmely navrh potreby (virtualneho) Boha;
a ze jeho uplne zavrhnutie kauzality a potreba kontingencie v prirode nie su zlucitelne, pretoze ta kontingencia v dosledku beztak implikuje kauzalitu alebo becoming.
ontologizuje Humeovi epistemologiu;
pletie si metafyzicku a natural necessity, co ho vedie k unjustifiable derivation of pure Chaos;
nerobi rozdiel medzi pure a applied matematikou, a kym reasoning bases on pure math, conclusions rozvadza siroko mimo nej;
@ part 3 – CHECK srnicek
Srnicek o tom ze via Laruelle’s non-phil (subjektivita ako formalistic procedure neredukovatelna na fenomenologicky/psych zaklad) sa da uniknut kapitalizmu,
ale ze realist ontology v sebe nemoze zahrnat grounds for eticku/politicku action (zbavuje iba kapitalistickej autority, ale nedava guidelines/imperatives dalej).
@ part 4
Meillassoux [core] robi rozdiel medzi ‘potencialitou’ a ‘virtualitou’ via Hume & Cantor.
Shaviro porovnava Harmana a Whiteheada – H’s non-relational ontology sux; H’s allure (linked to sublime) je aesth modernizmus, kym W’s beauty (‘the emergence of patterned contrasts’) je 21st c.
Harman [core]: Whitehead (like Latour) has an ontology of individual entities while Deleuze (like Bergson, Simondon, and Iain Hamilton Grant) do not view individuals as the basic personae of the world.
Latour [core] pise knihu o 14 modoch bytia via Souriau [tajne ich riesi od 1987] (do 2007 verejne nerobil phil rozdiel medzi phys/mental/animal/fictional actors), napr: phenomenon, thing, soul, fiction, God.
@ part 5
Protevi o Deleuzovom afekte via developmental systems theory, neurology and cognitive psychology,
conclusion
Zizek porovnava svoj materializmus s materializmami
scientific materialism (Darwinism, brain sciences),
‘discursive’ materialism (ideology as the result of material discursive practices),
Badiou’s ‘democratic materialism’ (the spontaneous egalitarian hedonism),
speculative.
only the assertion of the nature of reality as ‘non-All’ can sustain a truly materialist position.
SR future
teraz 4 hlavne debatne okruhy: politics/ethics, temporality, subjectivity/consciousness, and science/truth
Foucault (2001): Fearless Speech
lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt
semiotexte’s Foucault: Fearless Speech (2001)
prednasky v EN @ uni of cal in berkeley z 10-11/83 (dnes som inak komentoval assangeovo video
zeditovane pearsonom v 85
goal:
” My intention was not to deal with the problem of truth, but with the problem of truth-teller or truth-telling as an activity.
By this I mean that, for me, it was not a question of analyzing the internal or external criteria that would enable the Greeks and Romans,
or anyone else, to recognize whether a statement or proposition is true or not. At issue for me was rather the attempt
to consider truth-telling as a specific activity, or as a role. ” Discourse & Truth, Concluding remarks by Foucault.
/ ciel: nie schopnost urcit ci je vyrok pravdivy alebo nie, ale chapat pravdomluvnost ako specificku aktivitu, ako rolu.
” With the question of the importance of telling the truth, knowing who is able to tell the truth,
and knowing why we should tell the truth, we have the roots of what we could call the ‘critical’ tradition in the West.”
CHECK [107] – practice of parrhesia @ human relationships
[p 11-20]
[core] parrhesia = frankness + truth + criticism + danger + duty
– being ‘FRANK’ (instead of PERSUASION), povedat vsetko co mam na mysli, nic neskryvam
parrhesia – 2 types:
– ‘bad’ parrhesia ~ not far from ‘chattering’, saying any/everything one has in mind w/o qualification;
everyone has the right to address his fellow citizens even with the most stupid or dangerous things in the city;
verbal activity which reflects every movement of heart & mind
/ blogging, comments, twitter, ‘kazdy prd’ na youtube, total transparency freak leaking
– [core] positive parrhesia, ‘to tell the TRUTH’ (instead of FALSEHOOD or SILENCE);
p says what he _thinks_ is true [via mind], or does he say what _is_ really true [via ontology] ? —
he says what is true because he _knows_ that it _is_ true [mind+ontology], and he _knows_ that it is true because it is really true [mind+?].
~ there is exact coincidence bwn belief & truth [v grecku sa stretavali verbalne; v dnesnej kartezianskej koncepcii dokazu sa stretavaju mentalne]
/ je pravda, a niektore jej casti poznam.
cize nielenze je uprimny, ale navyse jeho nazor je pravdivy.
[core] cize zaroven tomu veri a zaroven to je pravda.
v grecku je pristup k pravde dany moralkou, ak mam urcite moralne vlastnosti, tak mam pristup k pravde (a tiez k jej odovzdaniu dalsim).
[core] u descarta to je inak, on si nie je isty ci to comu veri, je tiez pravda.
[core] ‘proof’ of sincerity of truth-teller is his ‘courage’
ak clovek povie nieco nebezpecne, je velke podozrenie ze je truth-teller.
vtedy sa pytame sami seba: je naozaj truth-teller? a – ako si moze byt isty ze to comu veri je pravda? (ta druha otazka sa grekov moc netyka, neriesili to)
[core] podmienka pre parrhesiu je pritomnost nebezpecenstva, ‘DANGER’, ze teller nieco riskuje
(napr ucitel povie detom ze ich uci – tym nic neriskuje, ale ked filozof povie tyranovi ze tyrania je zla lebo neni kompatibilna so spravodlivostou, tak riskuje)
[!] tyran neni truth-teller, lebo nic neriskuje
[core] a ten danger vychadza vzdy z druhych stran, nevrham sa do danger sam (napriklad pred sudom povedat nieco co moze byt proti mne zneuzite).
confession to someone who exercises power over speaker, and is able to censure or punish him for what he has done,
[core] takze funkcia p nie je demonstrovat pravdu druhemu, ale kritizovat ho = ‘CRITICISM’ (instead of FLATTERY),
alebo aj criticism sam voci sebe (ale vzdy ked speaker je v inferior pozicii).
[core] vzdy slabsi voci silnejsiemu (nie naopak, napr rodic voci dietatu, ale: filozof tyrana, ziak ucitela, obcan vacsinu)
[core] telling the truth is regarded as a (moral) ‘DUTY’ (instead of SELF-INTEREST and MORAL APATHY)
ked ma nikto netlaci hovorit, ale ja citim povinnost prehovorit, mam ‘FREEDOM’ prehovorit (nie som pod natlakom).
napr kriminal – p neni ked sa prizna pred sudom, ale ked sa prizna dobrovolne z moralnej povinnosti.
kritizovat priatela alebo panovnika – lebo je moja duty mu pomoct (kedze on nevidi jeho wrongdoings).
…..
/ !!!!! takze denouncement neni kompatibilny s parrhesiou !!!!
skor truthful criticism of a friend out of duty (risking our friendship), for his own good (and my good too)
[p 20-24]
tracing evolution of parrhesia via r/p/p:
rhetoric (long speech) is in strong opposition to parrhesia (dialogue) @socratic-platonic tradition,
ale neskor sa zacali blizit – parrhesia/freespeech ako retoricka figura (ktora ale nema prikrasy, a neni vlastne figura) & intesifies audience emotions
politics
@ atenska demokracia – which is def as constitution (politeia) in which ppl enjoyed ‘demokratia’, ‘isegoria’ (equal right of speech),
‘isonomia’ (equal part of all citizens in exercise of power), and ‘parrhesia’,
parrhesia appears in agora
@ hellenistic period – it’s advisor’s duty to use parrhesia to help king w/ decisions, and to prevent him from abusing his power (cize je dobra aj pre ludi),
ak ho kral ignoruje alebo tresta, je tyran,
parrhesia doesnt appear in agora anymore (iba medzi kralom a radcami, mimo dohlad ludi)
philosophy @ field of art of life
socrates in plato writings is p,
rel to ‘care of oneself’
[p 104]
[core] care of the self – what i think corresponds to what i say, and it corresponds to what i do (as in case of socrates, ultimate truth-teller) (?)
parrhesia = logos ~ truth ~ bios @ ethics; logos ~ truth ~ nomos @ politics
philosophical (new) parrhesia
– 3 types [p 106]:
1
2
3
– target: not to persuade the Assembly, but to convince someone that he must take care of himself and of others (= change his life)
– not specifically linked to agora or king’s court, but diverse places
leaks & ufo’s
In 755 AD, Mayan Priests prophesied that the total solar eclipse of July 11, 1991 would herald two life altering events for humankind –
Cosmic Awareness and Earth Changes. Shortly after 1:00 PM, on July 11, 1991, the prophecy seemingly began to unfold.
+
july 11, 1991 (7/11), Solar Eclipse, 100s of UFOs over MX, incl Mexico City, kde ich natocilo 17 ludi nezavisle na sebe = fears of US began
national MX TV broadcasted, US not.
US went to highest alert @ june 10, 2004 – massive fleet of UFOs @ Guadalajara, then ‘dimensionally returned’ to the ‘base’
od 2004 US vojna s UFOs based on or near the Continent of Antarctica, particularly the Southern Ocean.
12.12.2010 nad Chile
Ellison (2011): Wikileaks
by sarah ellison.
vanity fair owned by conde (owns wired).
6/10 Nick Davies read a four-paragraph story in his own paper about the arrest of Manning. Davies resolved to find Assange.
At the time of his meeting with Davies, Assange had repeatedly voiced frustration that his leaks hadn’t received the attention they deserved.
in BXL, Davis and Traynor went to the Hotel Leopold, woke up Assange, and began a conversation that lasted for the next 6 hrs
4th cache contains the personal files of all prisoners who had been held at Guantánamo.
Assange got on the phone and explained, falsely, according to Davies, that “it was always part of the agreement that I would introduce television at this stage.” Davies and Assange have not spoken since that afternoon.
In 2009, Guardian and Observer lost £37.9 mln and cut 203 jobs. Even after the job cuts, the two papers employ 630 journalists.
takze nyt&spiegel dostali via guardian via h brooke:
In October, while The Guardian was preparing to publish the Iraq War Logs and working on package three, Heather Brooke, a British freelance journalist who had written a book on freedom of information, had a copy of the package-three database leaked to her by a former WikiLeaks volunteer. Leigh shrewdly invited Brooke to join the Guardian team. He did not want her taking the story to another paper. Furthermore, by securing the same database from a source other than Assange, The Guardian might then be free of its promise to wait for Assange’s green light to publish. Leigh got the documents from Brooke, and the paper distributed them to Der Spiegel and The New York Times. The three news organizations were poised to publish the material on November 8.
That was when Assange stormed into Rusbridger’s office, threatening to sue. Rusbridger, Leigh, and the editors from Der Spiegel spent a marathon session with Assange, his lawyer, and Hrafnsson, eventually restoring an uneasy calm. Some in the Guardian camp had wanted to break off relations with Assange entirely. Rusbridger somehow kept all parties at the table—a process involving a great deal of coffee followed by a great deal of wine. Ultimately he agreed to a further delay, allowing Assange time to bring in other media partners, this time France’s Le Monde and Spain’s El País.
Justice Department lawyers were likely crossing their fingers that Assange would be extradited to Sweden and convicted, so they won’t have to attempt a tricky prosecution.
“He is short of money and short of secrets,” someone who has worked extensively with Assange told me. “The whole thing has collapsed.”
Smári McCarthy, who worked for WikiLeaks, maintained that “key people have become very concerned about the direction of WikiLeaks with regard to its strong focus on U.S. military files at the expense of ignoring everything else.” One associate of Assange’s says that, because of these departures, access to important elements of the site’s infrastructure has deteriorated, although Assange himself remains the key architect of the complex set of programs that underlie WikiLeaks and its content.
Domscheit-Berg’s book accuses Assange of “high-handedness, dishonesty, and grave mistakes,” and quotes him as dismissing criticism from colleagues with the words “I’m busy, there are two wars I have to end.”
Rusbridger: “Managing a relationship between a French afternoon paper, a Spanish daily, a German weekly, a paper on NY time, and a bunch of anarchists in hiding is trying!”
Assange’s former associates, disillusioned, likens Assange’s situation to the last scene in George Orwell’s Animal Farm, where the pigs are shown to have become indistinguishable from the human beings they had rebelled against.
Manovich (2008) – Software Takes Command
v http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/3/30/Lev_Manovich_-_Software_Takes_Command_%282008%29.txt
state of exception
z Santner, Eric L – On Creaturely Life. Rilke, Benjamin, Sebald.pdf
[ch 1]
‘state of exception’ (o nej pisem v eseji 1) – sebald’s ‘creaturely life’ (@santner’s book), heidegger, agamben, rilke, benjamin (‘petrified unrest’)
~ how human bodies and psyches register the “states of exception” that punctuate the “normal” run of social and political life.
The “essential disruption” that renders man “creaturely” for these writers has, that is, a distinctly political—or better, biopolitical—
aspect; it names the threshold where life becomes a matter of politics and politics comes to inform the very matter and materiality of life.
(eg. German Jews)
[ch 3]
~ ‘undeadness’ – the space between real and symbolic death = ultimate domain of creaturely life.
@ Sebald: the vampire, the Wandering Jew, Kafka’s hunter Gracchus, and Balzac’s Colonel Chabert.
( + zizek’s exception book )
[ch 4]
“postmemory,” a term coined by Marianne Hirsch to capture the peculiarities of the memory of events that hover
between personal memory and impersonal history, events one has not lived through oneself but that, in large measure through exposure
to the stories of those who did experience them, have nonetheless entered into the fabric of the self.
/ oralne historie nezazitych velkych eventov (00s o 60s)
freud’s ‘uncanny’ = ?
Cage on aesthetics
z Kostelanetz, Richard – Conversing With Cage, 2nd ed (2003)
cage, 83
I’m on the side of keeping things mysterious, and I have never enjoyed
understanding things. If I understand something, I have no further use for it. So I try to make a
music which I don’t understand and which will be difficult for other people to understand, too.
cage, 85
I like art to remain mysterious. I find that as long as a book or a painting or a piece of music is
not understood by me that I can use it. I mean use it in order to employ my faculties. If I
understand something I can put it on a shelf and leave it there. In the past I thought it had to do
with the feeling in Europe of a tradition or the history, whereas we here in America have very
little sense of history.
!!! cage, 72
I have from time to time, either for myself or for others, made statements that are like manifestos.
You know this is popular in the field of the arts—to say in a manifesto-style statement what
distinguishes the contemporary or modern thing from what isn’t. The first time I was asked to do
it, I did it with regard to painting.
I said that a painting was modern if it was not interrupted by
the effect of its environment—so that if shadows or spots or so forth fell on a painting and spoilt
it, then it was not a modern painting, but if they fell on it and, so to speak, were fluent with it,
then it was a modern painting.
Then, of course, I have said the same thing about music. If the music can accept ambient sounds
and not be interrupted thereby, it’s a modern piece of music. If, as with a composition of
Beethoven, a baby crying, or someone in the audience coughing, interrupts the music, then we
know that it isn’t modern. I think that the present way of deciding whether something is useful as
art is to ask whether it is interrupted by the actions of others, or whether it is fluent with the
actions of others.
What I have been saying is an extension of these notions out of the field of the
material of the arts into what you might call the material of society. If, for instance, you made a
structure of society that would be interrupted by the actions of people who were not in it, then it
would not be the proper structure.
^ aliens, my art, open work, participative, ….theory building
cage, 77
I think the history of art is simply a history of getting rid of the ugly by entering into it, and using
it. After all, the notion of something outside of us being ugly is not outside of us but inside of us.
And that’s why I keep reiterating that we’re working with our minds. What we’re trying to do is
to get them open so that we don’t see things as being ugly, or beautiful, but we see them just as
they are.
cage, 66
Formerly, one was accustomed to thinking of art as something better organized than life that
could be used as an escape from life. The changes that have taken place in this century, however,
are such that art is not an escape from life, but rather an introduction to it.
cage, 1978 – on improvised jazz
Aside from the question of rhythmic regularity, one of the reasons for my reticence regarding
jazz has to do with its conception and use of improvisation. This matter of improvisation has
always greatly concerned me. What I have never appreciated in improvisation is the return to
memory or to taste: the return of things that have been learned or to which one has become
accustomed—sometimes consciously, deliberately, sometimes insidiously. Phrases thought to be
original are only articulations heard a long time ago. In improvisation, when you think you are
following your own direction, most of the time you are following someone else’s line. At the
most, that is not what bothers me so much as the desire for uniqueness that appears in the act of
improvising. Once you realize the number of obstacles and of more or less deliberate references
that the improviser is struggling with, you can only smile at the claim to originality. The desire
for originality seems to be one of the great myths of jazz (and of a good part of contemporary
music in the classic tradition as well, for that matter). And it seems that not even “free jazz”
escapes this. I am bothered by these disproportionate assertions of the ego when I hear them. For
my own part, I do not look for originality. Whether or not my music is original does not concern
me. I would prefer to find a music separate from my memory and my tastes, which would in
some way be a discovery for me, and that has nothing to do with originality, because intention is
not involved. (Originality is always an effort, a state of tension. ) With an open-mindedness
toward the unintentional sound, I want not to control sound events but simply at most to write
instructions. That is why I’m against improvisation as it is usually understood (even if I
sometimes use it, because nothing should be prohibited!). [..]
The problem that jazz raises for me, at the level of rhythm, I repeat, is that I am bothered by its
regularity. I prefer the rhythm of what I call silence where sound can be born at any time.
cage, 1979 – silence & there’s always sound
I made a decision in the early fifties to accept the sounds that are in the world. Before that I had
actually been naive enough to think there was such a thing as silence. But I went into an
anechoic chamber in Cambridge, at Harvard University, and in this room I heard two sounds. I
thought there was something wrong with the room, and I told the engineer that there were two
sounds. He said describe them, and I did. “Well, ” he said, “the high one was your nervous
system in operation and the low one was your blood circulating. ” So that means that there is
music, or there is sound, whether I intend it or not.
cage, 1979 – silence & composing
What silence is is the change of my mind. It’s an acceptance of the sounds that exist rather than a
desire to choose and impose one’s own music. That has been at the center of my work ever since
then. I try when I make a new piece of music to make it in such a way that it doesn’t essentially
disturb the silence which already exists.
Wikirebels doc (12/2010)
povodne chceli overovat info cez public, to nebolo dobre – ludia nemaju resources, tak sa obratili na novinarov.
daniel domscheit-berg (schmitt) o wl pocul na konci 2007 via friends, zistil viac, quit job of computer consultant.
housing vo svedsku (kvoli silnemu free speech law) najprv chceli ‘tunnel traffic through PRQ to bypass IP bans), potom tam dali server.
ponukaju anonymizacne sluzby, VPN.. PRQ: “we accept everything that is legal under swedish law. regardless of how objectionable it is.
we don’t make moral judgements.”
smari mccarthy, “information activist”, island.
v 10/08 pada bankovy system na islande (17/18 je v haji?), wl leakne matros o bankach
hrafnsson (60?, artist?) pocul prvykrat v 8/09, pracoval vtedy ako reporter pre statnu tv
v islandskej TV assange+schmitt prezentovali ‘transparency haven’ ako novy biznis model pre IS (na sposob svajciarskeho tax haven)
IS transp haven proposal napisali za 4-5 hodin v hotelovej izbe from scratch: niekto z immi, mccarthy, jonsdottir (anti iraq war campainger), rob konkrep?, assange
akceptovany bez vyhrad(?) parlamentom
schmitt: society is just another system.
cables spolu s war reportami a videami dostali asi naraz, to sami nezvladnu – assange ukazal v reykjavickom kafe bagdad video hrafnssonovi
hrafnsson: hi res, good quality, excessive use of power to shoot people w/ 30mm bullets normally used to penetrate armed vehicles and tanks
assange: “different people talk about whether for US it is right or wrong to be in Iraq, nonetheless in this incident, even if you argue it was right
or wrong to be in iraq, even in that suburb at that time in hellicopter overlooking this wounded man crawling on the street,
it was not helpful for US that man to be shot”. reason? 1. it is a videogame. 2. they brag after kill
pre hrafnsson sa stalo obsesiou zistit identitu tych ludi, najma deti. letel do bagdadu, tv report pre islandsku telku,
nasiel rodinu deti a ukazal im video.
bolo dolezite oslovit NYT aj guardian, forced collaboration (miesto toho aby sutazili)
reakcia na video: je mozne ze wl a assange uz maju na svojich rukach krv nasich vojakov alebo afganskej rodiny. [asi fakt best co mohli povedat –
priamy utok naspat – obvinit ich z toho isteho (i ked bez dokazu) a ukazat ze tak spravili este vacsiu skodu]
iraq war logs analyzoval tim investigativny zurnalistov v londyne – TBIJ (data zurnalisti, atd, sef: iain overton).
reports written from incidents right after, day to day, through the eyes of soldiers.
a pri praci boli sledovani.
war data logs nehovoria o vojne cez typkov v air-conditioned rooms in green zones, ale cez smrt, incidenty v reali.
vo svedsku ziadal o azyl.
PP po dlhej debate prebrali web wikileaks.
svedsky sex: victim of personal revenge.
schmitt: zaber na assanga oslabilo organizaciu.
assange chcel vydat najvacsie ryby, schmitt to chcel postupne… velke si nechat na koniec
irc assange-schmitt o newsweek (anonymnom?) iview (asi nejaky clen wl):
schmitt: “face the fact that you don’t have much trust on the inside anymore. you behave like some kind of emperor or slave trader.”
schmitt: you have to be transparent yourself. you have to follow standards you expect from others.
takze daniel a dalsi (napr herbert snorrason, historian) su s nim v spore.
snorrason o assangovi: “if you have a problem with me, just piss off.”
potichu si rozbehli a zaciatkom dec spustili svoj projekt openleaks (asi sedia niekde v berline s club mate na stole)
mccarthy: information spreads borderlessly, states have to rethink how they approach info, if they dont they will cease to exist.
hrafnsson: “democracy without transparency is not democracy”.
Rick Falkvinge (2007): swedish Pirate Party
lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt
rick falkvinge, oscon 2007 (o’reilly conf, portland OR), lecture, founder of swedish pirate party
http://blip.tv/file/318885/
=
main point v debate ci filesharing je dobry pre ekonomiku: copyright = commercial monopoly
copyright today has crapped into our private communications (it is illegal for me to send music in email to you guys)
if copyright is to be enforced in the digital age that means it [interferes] with our emails.
=> that means that every single piece of private communication has to be monitored by law enforcement and by corporate interest groups guarding copyright to watch for the copyright infringements.
it gets worse:
corporates lobby for ISP for being liable for what their users do.
=> that threatens the ‘common carrier principle’ that messenger is never responsible for the content of the message
= both are centuries old principles of how our democracy works
lady justice has a trouble:
on one end: income for luxury consumption; on another end: 2 principles of our democracy.
=> tiez ak je kazdy email kontrolovany, tak whistleblower protection is gone.
=> if you know you’re monitored you tend to put restraint on yourself.
a ked nemas moznost formulovat svoje myslienky privatne, you lose your identity (ktora je vytvarana v private exchange bwn you and your friends).
= you need privacy, you need a postal secret
corps nas chcu presvedcit o tom ze to je otazka profitu (a udrzania monopolov), no pritom je to otazka zakladnych ludskych prav.
summary of pirate party:
copyright has nothing to do @ my private communication; lifetime+70 yrs is ridiculous as a copyright term for commercial use;
DRM is evil; patents are even more evil (ranging from useless to immoral to diabolical);
privacy is good; dual process(?) is good; and transparent government is even better;
we also safeguard the right of attribution for the copyright very strongly
other parties when realised are loosing votes to PP came to them and ask to have things explained.
norska liberalna strana dokonca skopirovala cely ich stance on copyright
vo svedsku su dve silne strany,
we play ‘who wants to be the prime minister’, the price for that would be the IP rights reform
Raunig reinterpretuje Foucaultove archetypy poznania
lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt
In 1984, in his last lectures entitled La Courage de la Verité
http://eipcp.net/transversal/1210/raunig/en
=
multiple forms of truth discourses (from antiquity)
of which three can be seen as figures of imparting knowledge:
/ existuje niekolko foriem diskurzov pravdy, z nich tri su vnimane cez poznanie (ale netyka sa poznania vsetka pravda? wp: poznanie ako prienik medzi pravdou a vierou)
* (classic) teacher
knowledge as techne, as an ability embodied in a practice.
In this mode of embodiment knowledge is owned, passed on from one to another as property, from teacher to pupil in a long chain of tradition, in a hierarchy of generations and a uniform, static order of knowledge.
a rigid striation and separation of the various techniques and disciplines.
the point is to develop a rhetorical practice that seeks conflict and transversal exchange beyond the boundaries of traditions and disciplines.
/ odovzdava sa z pokolenia na pokolenie, je to objekt, property, vec. …nie event!!!!
/ co ma za nasledok delenie na discipliny, napr na uni
/ ciel je zamerat sa na hranicne praktiky, konfliktne body, praktiky ktore sa stavaju nad hranice
* (universalist) wise man
his form of imparting only consists in being a role model, in epitomizing, exemplifying.
disregard for every kind of singularity, specificity, situativity.
/ byt stelesnenim poznania. vnutri seba. ‘ucit bytim’. ale problem je ze tiez nie je event, je to staticke. neviem odovzdat nieco na poziadanie..
* prophet, (charismatic) master-prophet
has the role of an imparter, but at the same time, he does not speak for himself, in his own name.
/ nechapem. zosobnuje poznanie, ale nehovori za seba?? hovori “we”? ako guy a pod a aktivisti v knihach?
/ foucault nema nic o chapani poznania ako eventu? (ma.. nasleduje stvrty typ)
/ toto je asi rozdiel!!!
/ prva cast bola o ‘knowledge that’, dalsia bude o knowledge as an event? nestratim sa v tom ale? nemam sa tu moc o co opriet…
delanda v new philosophy of society ani objekt as event nerozvija… mozno spekulativni realisti…
to je vnimanie objektu cez procesy, cez jeho vlastnosti ktore su v pohybe.
performing the knowledge…. knowledge production wl supplies ‘truth’, media debate enhances ‘belief’, and knowledge is being performed.
knowledge about how our world functions, in a dynamic way, what processes are inherent in the debate.
this is democracy – clash of various (incoherent) worldviews
* parrhesia, truth-speaking = “fearless speach” [rough translation], “frankness in speaking the truth”
fourth form of truth discourse that goes beyond the types of the teacher, the wise man and the prophet.
in 3 variations:
the political truth-speaking of the citizen to the majority of the assembly or the philosopher to the tyrant
/ excluded to the included?; mat prave ten jeden hlas len, voci majorite
ethical truth-speaking as test and exercise leading to care for the self and others. the questioning perfected by Socrates
socrates nie je teacher, wise man, ani prophet.
His craft consists not of teaching and imparting, but rather in a practice of calling-into-question.
Knowledge arises in the movement, which generates a differentiation, “as difference, as distance, attained contrary to general opinion and shared certaintiesâ€.
“school of the missing teacher†(“l’école du maître qui manqueâ€)
practice of the Cynics as exercising the scandal of the truth, as “philosophical activism” and as a predecessor of the revolutionary movements of the 19th and 20th century.
this one is most relevant today.
/ assange???
+ moje reci:
; knowledge production, negotiation
na bxl openvideo workshope som povedal: debaty/spory na wikipedii? to je na nej najzaujimavejsie. ostatni stichli a pozreli na mna.
this is the event of knowledge production.
We would like to understand knowledge not as a static property, an object being transmitted from one node to another,
like a file being copied. Filesharing only gives means for knowledge being produced. Participation in the discussion
One may say the actual wikipedia pages are but the detritus of the knowledge. The event of knowledge production
is metasthasised in the wikipedia discussion pages, and in the articles and books being referred to, where it is being negotiated
by the users. We should [pripomenut] that the discussion pages accomodate the private mode of conversation, when the subset
of NPOV rules haunts the discussion.
/ v tom zlyhava log – iba transmituje data, miesto aby bol knowledge production platform
/ na prednej strane prebieha akurat formalna/technicka debata, ak ide o argument tak sa debata presuva do discussion
Zizek about Foucault’s knowledge
To Foucault, knowledge exists only where power relations are suspended. To Zizek, this Foucauldian position is false: there is no knowledge that does not presuppose power relations.
There is no place beyond discourse and the power relations that govern them; resistance and change are possible from within them (Zizek: Beyond Foucault, p. 90).
It is this position that colors the primary difference between the political strategies of Zizek over Foucault. To Zizek, revolutionary potential must be sought within the capitalist system of desire, and it must seek to be universalized.
/ takze aj wikileaks ma power
/ task: how to universalize revolutionary potential within the capitalist system of desire, aka je esencia toho co robia wikileaks?
a na zaklade toho – co robia zle?
/ presne takto by som mal pokracovat dalej [riesim teraz otazku transparency]
/ lokalizovat hlavne kontradikcie na ktorych sa pohybuje wikileaks (a s nimi aj globalna debata) a univerzalizovat ich
(v zmysle zizeka/kanta). cize lokalizovat ‘excluded’ – excluded informacie, treba zapojit do commons.
aby sa potom v ramci commons riesili problemy majetku a hodnoty objektu (vratane updatu tychto terminov)
/ scientific journalism – tiez zasadne tuna
/ excluded – otazka – vyradeni z coho? a co je tu commons?
+ moje reci k wikileaks:
otazka ludskeho poznania – chcu vytvorit intellectual/ record of how civilisation works in practise; our decisions are based on what we know.
je to nieco niekde, ktore mame odhalit a dostat k nemu pristup.
proste kopa, ktora je pod zamkom.
to snad ide do epistemologie – foucaultove pisanie o poznani spada pod nu?
; filesharing
? obmedzit cely clanok na filesharing? kludne.. filesharing in the context of political economy
mozno vysvetlit aj veci okolo, ale povedat ze ich nebudem teraz rozvijat
; propositions via potentialities
podla whiteheada potom pri cables pre nas nie je otazka ci su skutocne alebo falosne (pre wl tim bola otazka,
ci ich releasnu – to ci su prave bola len jedna z veci na zaklade ktorej zvazovali).
ale aky otvaraju v kulture potencial. W: “proposition points to a potentiality [..]
propositions are possible routes of actualization, vectors of nondeterministic change.
The “pri- mary role” of a proposition, Whitehead says, is to “pave the way along which the world advances into novelty.”.
^ takto citaj dokumenty ktore releasuje wl, a ktore obsahuje wp, a ktore siri tpb
vsetky tri su platformy, ktore maju podobne ambicie (aku hlavnu premisu ma tpb?)
=
task: open up access to excluded knowledge
; epistemology / knowledge that+how+acq
epistemologia – knowledge that [classical propositional knowledge = prienik medzi truths and beliefs], knowledge how, acquaintance knowledge…
ze 2 a 2 su 4. ale ze ako sa rata.
pozeram okolo na veci viem povedat ze su a kolko ich je.
ale o vacsine z nich neviem ako vznikli, ako stali sebou.
kutili su deleuziani.
viem ze nie co je, viem o vela veciach ze su.
ale viem len o malo z nich ako vznikli.
teda ake procesy v nich prebiehaju.
lebo sa menia dalej.
nie su fixne, nedorazili z buducnosti aby ostali rovnake, ani neplanuju ostavat rovnake s vyhladom do buducnosti.
menia ich ich procesy.
ktore ich formuju.
napr flasa vina… ako to ze je flasa vina? proces vyroby flase, proces vyroby vina, vinica, pestovanie vinica, distribucia, sklad, predaj, spotreba
recyklacia flase na inu flasu.
Chris Anderson: Free
30+ ‘free’ gen – each time you hear free, reach your pocket vs pre-30 google gen – yea free!
controversialist, ale snad ok: “Any topic that can divide critics equally into two opposite camps..totally wrong. and .so obvious..has got to be a good one.”
este precitaj dalej
Zizek (2010): Living in the End Times
lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt
polit econ
[186] Badiou – 3 mozne zlyhania revolucnej lavice
=> vsetko zle. treba revolucneho agenta ktory je neoddelitelnou sucastou systemu dostat do subjektivity
/ akoze treba byt politickejsi? a revolucnejsi v kazdodennosti?
Marx pre-1850s: ‘Marxist’ theory
ciel, postcapitalist society, je socialna forma kde transhistoricka praca, oslobodena od fetters of trhu a osobneho vlastnictva,
has openly emerged as the regulating principle of society.
‘economic base’ vs legal/ideological ‘superstructure’
naive historicist evolutionism ~ ahistorical absolutization of labor (process of mat prod and repr of life) as ‘key’ to other phenomena
cosi s Heideggerovou dialectic-of-Enlitenment temou technokratickej ‘instrumental reason’ to ma, ze domination is grounded in very notion of labor
eg. German Ideology
Marx v 1850s inspirovany znovucitanim Hegelovej Science of Logic, vsetko prehodnotil a skomplikoval
mainly in: Grundrisse, a najma Capital
dosiel na to ze commodity fetishism ako iluzia nie je len sekundarna reflection, ale operuje v srdci ‘realneho procesu vyroby’
cize uloha nie je odhalit ako sa z bezneho reallife objektu stava fetisizovana komodita (mysterious theological entity),
ale odhalit ‘metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties’ v naoko beznom objekte
comm fetish = belief that commodities are magical objects with inherent metaphysical powers
Karatani: marx inak zacal tym ze kritika nabozenstva je pociatok vsetkej kritiky, presiel ku kritike filozofie, a skoncil pri kritike polit econ,
pri ktorej sa oblukom dostal naspat k tomu ze viera (v objekty) je v srdci ‘prizemnej’ ekonomickej aktivity
Engels tiez chapal produkciu jednak v ekonomickom zmysle (extrakcia komodit z prirody), jednak v spolocenskom (produkcia zivota, napr rodenie)
Stalder (29 Nov 2010): Wikileaks
born 68
wl contains 4 large-scale trends in society:
* change in the materiality of communication.
Communication becomes more extensive, more recorded, and the records become more mobile
* crisis of institutions, particularly in western democracies
* rise of new actors, “super-empowered” individuals, capable of intervening into historical developments at a systemic level
* structural transformation of the public sphere (through media consolidation at one pole, and the explosion of non-institutional publishers at the other),
rivals Habermas’ version
9/11: kritika ze aparat sa o tom nedozvedel lebo nebol dostatocne prepojeny
inability to connect data located in different bureaucratic domains was one of the main criticisms coming out the enquires into the 9/11 attacks.
->
wikileaks ukazuje ze teraz su prepojeni, ale k files maju pristup kvanta ludi
Within certain organisation such as banks and the military, virtually everything is classified and large number of people have access to this data
=
There is an inherent paradox. Vast streams of classified records need to flow freely in order to sustain complex,
distributed and time-sensitive operations. Yet, since the information is classified, it needs to flow within strict
boundaries which cannot be clearly defined on a general level (after all, you never know what needs to get connected
with what in advance), and it needs to flow through many, many hands. This creates the techno-organisational preconditions
for massive amounts of information to leak out.
zamestnanci corps a statneho aparatu leakuju lebo sa necitia identifikovani s org… ich miesta su nahraditelne [weber’s rational-legal org]
a corp od nich chce aby boli kreativni a samostatni, a oni vedia ze ich berie ako docasny naklad/zdroj
-> tato disonancia produkuje motivaciu leaknut
WL created a custom-made infrastructure to receive these torrents of records.
WL managed for the first time to create an effective infrastructure for anonymous communication.
/ mirrored DNSs, mirrored content, ssh, tor access/uploads, pgp v mailoch.. server v atomovom kryte.. networked org.. not paid..
/ takze ma doveru potencionalnych whistleblowerov, ktori navyse vidia ze leak infa bude mat dosah
!! na rozdiel od piratebay:
they built social intelligence (filtering, editorial control) into the system in order to encourage only one type of anonymous speech – whistle-blowing – while insulating themselves from the usual criticisms of anonymous communication (child-porn trafficking and the like).
; rhetorics
moralist – Blair’s “humanitarian wars” to advance human rights; Irak aj Afganistan – prinesieme demokraciu a prosperitu, vytiahneme ich z obc.vojny, oslobodime zeny. vojaci mozu byt na to hrdi
/ ? ale na druhej strane je Assange tiez moralista, resp etik – bojuje proti cenzure, za hodnoty slobody tlace a slobody prejavu, ciel ma odhalovat opresivne rezimy. chce vyriesit problem cenzury tlace a prejavu (press and whistleblowers)
/ ? su motivy WL moralisticke? alebo eticke? aky rozdel medzi moral and ethical? – asi nie, obe: good/evil, right/wrong, virtue/vice, justice..
super-empowered individuals
Military strategists have been talking about ‘super-empowered individuals’ by which they mean someone who
“is autonomously capable of creating a cascading event, […] a “system perturbation”; a disruption of system function and invalidation of existing rule sets to at least the national but more likely the global scale. The key requirements to become “superempowered” are comprehension of a complex system’s connectivty and operation; access to critical network hubs; possession of a force that can be leveraged against the structure of the system and a wilingness to use it”
http://zenpundit.blogspot.com/2006/10/super-empowered-individual-man-is.html
..this concept has been exclusively applied to terrorism and it reduces structural dynamics to individual actions.
=> individuals, supported by small, networked organisations, can now intervene in social dynamics at a systemic level, for the better or worse.
shows strenghts & weaknesses of being centred around single charismatic individual
weak: authoritarianism, lack of internal procedure, dangers of burnout and internal and external attacks on the credibility of that single person (if not worse)
/ tu sa ale mina.. otazka je ci je assange naozaj taky centralny… aj ked mi tuto ideu zatial nenarusilo nic… asi fakt je.
Wikileaks & Cablegate (2010)
research z vela zdrojov
lepsia verzia v txt:
—>udalost roka v politike?
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/
next: zaciatkom 2011 leak internej dokumentacie US banky
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-us-embassy-cables-live-updates
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/the-us-embassy-cables
cela sekcia v guardiane venovana jednotlivym leakom
SUMMARY OF CABLEGATE CONTEXT
5 medii: NYT, Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais, Der Spiegel
NYT editor Kellher: The London newspaper, The Guardian, gave us a copy of the archive, because they considered it a continuation of our collaboration on earlier WikiLeaks disclosures. (The Guardian initially asked us not to reveal that they were our source, but the paper’s editor said on Sunday night that he was no longer concerned about anonymity.)
wall street journal odmietol, lebo mal podpisat dohodu bez toho ze by vedeli co dokumenty obsahuju.
na http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ publikuju ~140 docs/day (dovedna 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words….
7x vacsie ako iraq war logs, the world’s previously largest classified information release), bude to trvat niekolko mesiacov.
vybrane media ich asi dostavaju o den skor alebo tak.
cables date from 28.12.1966 till 28.2.2010.
confidential communications between 274 embassies/consulates/diplomatic missions in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC.
15,652 of the cables are classified Secret.
The cables show the extent of US spying on its allies and the UN;
turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in “client states”;
backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries;
lobbying for US corporations;
and the measures US diplomats take to advance those who have access to them.
leaked from SIPRNet – us gov agency internet internal network (pristup ma 2.5 mil ludi, civilian/military/private sector personnel, aj 20-somethings vojaci), vytvoreny po 9/11
assange ma vo wikileaks org rolu pritahovania kritiky a pozornosti (aby org fungovala v chode) – je to tazke, ale na druhej strane dostava credit.
“we have always exptected the tremendous criticism. it is my role to be a lightning rod, to attract the attacks against the organisation
where i work. and that is a difficult role. on the other hand i also get an undue(?) credit.”
MAJOR LEAKS
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cable-leak-diplomacy-crisis
(TOP) UN: US officials have been instructed to spy on the UN leadership.
(TOP) US-Arabs-Iran: Arab leaders are privately urging an air strike on Iran
US does not secretly want to go to war with Iran but it has resisted pressure to do so from Israel and Arab leaders acting out of a coincidental common interest.
(TOP) North Korea: China wants Korean reunification. [asi preto lebo hrozi vojna s Juznou]
US claim Iran bought 19 BM-25 missiles from North Korea. [Russia doesnt believe it, neither the existence of missiles] / http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/30
At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.
@WL: http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10STATE17263.html
How the hacker attacks which forced Google to quit China in January were orchestrated by a senior member of the Politburo who typed his own name into the global version of the search engine and found articles criticising him personally.
use by Berlusconi of a “shadowy” Russian-speaking Italian go-between.
Russia and its intelligence agencies are using mafia bosses to carry out criminal operations = “virtual mafia state”.
Putin as an “alpha-dog”, Hamid Karzai as being “driven by paranoia” while Angela Merkel allegedly “avoids risk and is rarely creative”.
Yemeni president Abdullah Saleh said: “We’ll continue saying they are our bombs, not yours.”
US nuclear weapons still left in Europe are based in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Turkey. The four nations have been long suspected of hosting the warheads, but NATO and the governments involved have always refused to confirm this.
+
* PAKISTAN: US believes under economic pressure they may sell enriched Uranium (capable of making a nuke) to terrorists
* KOREA: US and South Korea discussed a unified Korea, and SK has considered commercial inducements to China in order to get it
* GUANTANAMO BAY: The US has pressured countries to take prisoners from there (into their own prisons) in return for favors
* AFGHANISTAN: The Afghan Vice-President was found with $52million in cash when visiting UAE (implying massive levels of corruption)
* CHINA: China really did hack Google China, and has also hacked western government and corporate PCs
* SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi donors are still the chief sponsors of Al Qaeda + King Abdullah dislikes Iraqi and Pakistani leaders
* RUSSIA: Putin and Berlusconi are bffs to the point that Berlusconi is Russia’s mouthpiece in Europe (talk of lavish gifts both ways)
* LEBANON: US failed to stop Syria from (secretly and against agreement) supplying arms to Hezbolla which now has a massive stockpile of them
* GERMANY: US warned Germany not to arrest CIA officers involved in a bungled kidnapping of German civilian
* ISRAEL: Concerns it will strike Iran if Iran continues nuclear development
* YEMEN: Took credit on US’ request for missile strike on Al Qaeda
* IRAN: US is getting increasingly worried that Iran has the capabilites to produce Uranium, Ahmadinejad was also compared to Hitler
* LIBYA: Qaddafi has a “Ukrainian nurse” companion that never leaves his side + he reneged on a deal to return uranium to Russia
* BRITAIN: Cameron has been reported to be “easily intimidated” and “indecisive” by US Intelligence
* ARGENTINA: Hillary Clinton wanted to know if President Cristina Fernandez is a batshit crazy bitch and if she was taking drugs.
* VENEZUELA: Chavez should be isolated from the world.
+
cables are unlikely to gratify conspiracy theorists. They do not contain evidence of assassination plots, CIA bribery or such criminal enterprises as the Iran-Contra scandal in the Reagan years, when anti-Nicaraguan guerrillas were covertly financed.
(since “top secret” files are not circulating @ siprnet)
takze low level data (tiez povedal Ellsberg)
PUBLIC RESPONSES
v komentoch: dokumenty hovoria o tom co uz davno vieme ~ “no surprises” ~
WikiLeaks files only fill in details about what has generally already been known.
“There’s nothing new here, but WikiLeaks is dangerous!”
kontra: usa vedie tajnu vojnu proti al-qaide v jemene, dohoda s jemenskym prezidentom ze budu dalej hovorit ze na nich hadzu svoje bomby;
US spies on UN officials
A Sunday Times journalist suggested his mother’s lasagne recipe was secret, but that didn’t make it interesting.
vs: dat ho za mreze / zabit
21:34 < pht`> symbolicky poriadok ako zdielane klamstvo, o ktorom to kazdy vie, ale predsa sa udrzuje
sebej: jalova senzacia
+
velkolepe media headlines:
“new age of transparency”
“age of leaks”
“First Major Event in the New Epoch of Information Transparency”
….leaks tu boli aj predtym, napr watergate, dokumenty sa sirili fotografiou
+
heather brooke: ak vlada zaklada svoju moc na informaciach, je tazke ju monopolizovat, pretoze moze byt velmi lahko dispersed
ROZDIEL – toto su udalosti z celeho sveta, worldwide significance
+ ..
Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia: “@wikileaks Speaking as Wikipedia’s co-founder, I consider you enemies of the U.S.–not just the government, but the people.”
Max Boot, senior fellow at the US foreign affairs thinktank the Council on Foreign Relations: “This is journalism as pure vandalism.”
CONDEMNATION – “international condemnation of WikiLeaks” & arguments to shut WL down [by politicians all over the world, int’l orgs, etc..]
is putting at risk the lives and the freedom of countless Americans and non-Americans around the world. [hypocrisy]
damage to national security.
H Clinton: leaks imperils lives and US diplomatic efforts.
“this disclosure is not just an attack on America’s foreign policy interests, it is an attack on the international community, the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity.”
“I want to make clear that our official foreign policy is not set in these messages but here in Washington.”
“Every country, including the United States, must be able to have candid [uprimny] conversations about the people and nations with whom they deal. And every country, including the United States, must be able to have honest, private dialogue with other countries about issues of common concern. I know that diplomats around the world share this view… We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off.”
right-wing Le Figaro, close to the French government, ran an editorial entitled “The tyranny of transparency” saying: “The massive diffusion of secret documents belonging to American diplomacy is an act of malice, about which it would be very naïve to rejoice.”
Socialist party was as critical of the leaks as Sarkozy’s right-wing UMP party. The socialist Jean-Christophe Cambadélis complained of “the tyranny of transparency with no limits” .
Francois Baroin, FR budget minister and government spokesman, told Europe1 radio, “I always thought a transparent society would be a totalitarian society.”
IT foreign minister Frattini: “the 9/11 of world diplomacy”;
IT head of Frattini’s party in the lower house of parliament: the documents were representative of a new form of “media terrorism”
US Republican congressman Peter King: WL should be treated as a terrorist organisation.
Ahmadinejad: disclosure that Arab states wanted to attack Iran was not a genuine leak, but part of a US campaign of psychological warfare.
Some part of the American government produced these documents. We don’t think this information was leaked. We think it was organised to be released on a regular basis and they are pursuing political goals.
WikiLeaks “game” is “not worth commenting upon and that no one would waste their time reviewing them”.
FR gov: attack on democracy
Rep congressman Peter Hoekstra of Michigan: “The catastrophic issue here is just a breakdown in trust,”
many other countries – allies and foes alike – are likely to ask, ‘Can the United States be trusted? Can the United States keep a secret?'”
foreign policy hawk Lieberman: “I hope we are doing everything we can to take down their website.”
q of creative act
PZI otazka: je na wikileaks nieco kreativne? v zmysle whiteheada… does it give us something new? if yes, what is it?
ukazuje silu (taktickeho) filesharingu. [takticky zacal byt s iraq war logs, ked dali obsah najprv vybranym global mediam]
ake fikcie vytvara? W’s propositions as fiction-actual border object; “the tales that might be told about particular actualities”
existuje nejaka seriozna analyza wikileaks? napr z pohladu OOO?
co ine by sa dalo spravit s tymito docs? vykalibrovali to tak ze maju naozaj globalnu pozornost a generuju chaos, atomova memeticka bomba
q of public domain
releasing confidential gov data to public domain (where public gov data normally go)
q of accountability
na jednej strane debata o zopovednosti v suvislosti s transparentnostou, online identitou, ne-anonymnostou,
na druhej napr ranciere a bishop ktori argumentuju proti moral arguments / ethical standpoints
(podla ranciera dokonca pre-poeticky/pre-mimeticky/pre-reprezentivny), a PRO esteticky rezim umenia
q of responsibility
JA: I originally tried hard for the organisation to have no face, because I wanted egos to play no part in our activities. This followed the tradition of the French anonymous pure mathematians, who wrote under the collective allonym, “The Bourbaki”. However this quickly led to tremendous distracting curiosity about who and random individuals claiming to represent us. In the end, someone must be responsible to the public and only a leadership that is willing to be publicly courageous can genuinely suggest that sources take risks for the greater good. In that process, I have become the lightening rod. I get undue attacks on every aspect of my life, but then I also get undue credit as some kind of balancing force.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/dec/03/julian-assange-wikileaks
q information transparency
ako meni transparentnost politiku a diplomaciu? politicke strany propagujuce transparentnost vyhravaju hlasy, ale v polit stranickej praxi
je transp nepresaditelna. vid Veci Verejne cz, alebo SK watchdog NGO + SAS).
MTP open org.
Kelly: transparency required @ The Cloud
WL is a symptom not a feature, due to a lack of trust and transparency between US Gov and its people.
niekt0: teoreticky je mozne podhodit medzi 100 pravych dokumentov jeden falosny
There is a certain vicious amorality about the Mark Zuckerberg-ian philosophy that all transparency is always and everywhere a good thing, particularly when it’s uttered by the guy who’s busily monetizing your radical transparency.
Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”
novinari exposing secrets – selfish. And the way most journalists “expose” secrets as a professional practice — to the extent that they do — is just as narrowly selfish: because they publicize privacy only when there is profit to be made in doing so, they keep their eyes on the valuable muck they are raking, and learn to pledge their future professional existence on a continuing and steady flow of it. In muck they trust.
goal: not transparency, but just society. “It is not our goal to achieve a more transparent society; it’s our goal to achieve a more just society.”
Wikileaks “practices civil obedience, that is, we are an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction.”
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034040-3,00.html
secrecy is not evil. “We keep secret the identity of our sources, as an example, [and] take great pains to do it. So secrecy is important for many things but shouldn’t be used to cover up abuses.”
(kym napr Zuckerberg je za dismissal of all secrecy)
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034040-3,00.html
q of censorship
JA: The west has fiscalised its basic power relationships through a web of contracts, loans, shareholdings, bank holdings and so on. In such an environment it is easy for speech to be “free” because a change in political will rarely leads to any change in these basic instruments. Western speech, as something that rarely has any effect on power, is, like badgers and birds, free. In states like China, there is pervasive censorship, because speech still has power and power is scared of it. We should always look at censorship as an economic signal that reveals the potential power of speech in that jurisdiction. The attacks against us by the US point to a great hope, speech powerful enough to break the fiscal blockade.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/dec/03/julian-assange-wikileaks
assange’s portraits
Raffi Khatchadourian’s June portrait in The New Yorker, which makes Assange sound like a master spy in a John le Carré novel.
Tunku Varadarajan’s epic ad hominem bloviation in The Daily Beast: “With his bloodless, sallow face, his lank hair drained of all color, his languorous, very un-Australian limbs, and his aura of blinding pallor that appears to admit no nuance, Assange looks every inch the amoral, uber-nerd villain.”
wikileaks IS NOT assange – strategia prezitia v pripade vrazdy/zatknutia/zrusenia webu
WikiLeaks has released an encrypted 1.4 gigabyte file called “insurance.aes256.”
If something happens to Assange, the password to the encrypted file will be released (presumably via a single Twitter tweet).
What’s in the file? We don’t know.
at 1.4 gigabytes, it is nineteen times the size of the Afghan war log that was recently distributed to major newspapers.
hackers scandals in history
Gary McKinnon 66 aq 3 akbal I – get via blank or default pwds to Pentagon/US systems search for UFO/anti-gravity/free energy proofs
Daniel Ellsberg 31 ar 11 kan II – 71 released Pentagon Papers, study of US government decision-making about the Vietnam War, to The New York Times
inspirovany by epiphany he got @ 69 anti-Viet war speech by pacifist who was excited to be able to join his friends in prison.
via xerox.
ukazali ze Johnsonova administrativa vytrvalo klamala nielen verejnosti, ale aj Kongresu – vedeli ze vojnu asi nevyhraju a bude viac obeti ako
sa vseobecne predpokladalo.
novinar z Times porusil dohodu a publikovali komentar, Nixon zastavil vydavanie novin na 2 tyzdne, zatial ale Ellsberg leakol dalsim 18 novinam.
NYT a Wash Post vyhrali Supreme Court case proti vlade a mohli publikovat dokumenty bez cenzury ~ sloboda tlace je vyssia ako udrzat utajene info.
Brian Manning via Wikileaks
ROZDIEL – toto su udalosti z celeho sveta, worldwide significance
pre-emptive actions from politicians
Hillary Clinton obehla hlavnych spojencov a varovala ich ze vyjdu von leaky.
Clinton led a frantic damage limitation exercise this weekend as Washington prepared foreign governments for the revelations, contacting leaders in Germany, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, France and Afghanistan.
new US ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron Munter, published an article on Nov 30 in a Pakistan’s English-language paper, the News, which aims to pre-empt unflattering references to the Pakistani government and its military.
“Of course, even a solid relationship will have its ups and downs,” he says, adding later that: “Honest dialogue – within governments and between them – is part of the basic bargain of international relations; we couldn’t maintain peace, security, and international stability without it. I’m sure that Pakistan’s ambassadors to the United States would say the same thing.”
(cables include allegations that the military is colluding with militant groups and unflattering pen portraits of leading politicians)
TRIVIA
Manning: “[I] listened and lip-synched to Lady Gaga’s Telephone while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history.”
in “It was childishly easy. I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like ‘Lady Gaga’ … erase the music … then write a compressed split file. No one suspected a thing …”
he “had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 8+ months”.
Manning uploaded all files to “freedom of information activists” wikileaks.org (?!) — to muselo byt okolo 5 gb
Assange and his circle apparently decided against immediately making the cables public. Instead they embarked on staged disclosure of the other material – aimed, as they put it on their website, at “maximising political impact”.
Although none of the Wired articles ever mention this, the first Lamo-Manning communications were not actually via chat. Instead, Lamo told me that Manning first sent him a series of encrypted emails which Lamo was unable to decrypt because Manning “encrypted it to an outdated PGP key of mine” [PGP is an encryption program]. After receiving this first set of emails, Lamo says he replied — despite not knowing who these emails were from or what they were about — by inviting the emailer to chat with him on AOL IM, and provided his screen name to do so. Lamo says that Manning thereafter sent him additional emails encrypted to his current PGP key, but that Lamo never bothered to decrypt them. Instead, Lamo claims he turned over all those Manning emails to the FBI without ever reading a single one of them. Thus, the actual initial communications between Manning and Lamo — what preceded and led to their chat — are completely unknown. Lamo refuses to release the emails or chats other than the small chat snippets published by Wired.
teda manning nasiel lama cez twitter #wikileaks, poslal mu maily kryptovane jeho starym pgp klucom, lamo ich nevedel otvorit a poslal mu svoj aim nick, manning mu poslal dalsie maily s novym klucom, tie lamo vraj nedekryptoval a rovno ich poslal fbi
otazka teda preco si manning vybral prave lama; a preco lamo tvrdi ze ich neotvoril (asi sa boji ze by to z neho fbi vymazali:)
^ http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/18/wikileaks/index.html
; ad censorship
Assange: “I am a journalist, a publisher and an inventor,” Assange says. “I have tried to invent a system that solves the problem of censorship of the press and the censorship of the whistle-blower across the whole world.”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2007375,00.html
; aim: to expose oppresive regimes & to show how society really works right now
Wikileaks is developing an uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Our primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations. We aim for maximum political impact.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080314204422/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About
WL eg. published a manual from Camp Delta at Guantánamo Bay, an internal report commissioned by oil-trading company Trafigura detailing the dumping of potentially toxic material off the African coast and a video of a 2007 American helicopter attack that killed two Reuters journalists in Baghdad — which Reuters had lobbied unsuccessfully for years to have released. WikiLeaks’ release of documents alleging corruption in Kenya won the site an award from Amnesty International. And with the Afghan papers, Assange “has basically guaranteed that think tanks, academics and analysts will study his website for some time. It’s history right there on the Internet for everyone to see,” says Paul Rogers, a British academic and security correspondent for the website OpenDemocracy.net.
+
a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Leaks
+
Assange @ Oslo Freedom Forum:
“So, in this broader framework of what we do, it is to try and build a historical record, an intellectual record,
of how civilisation actually works in practice, now, from the inside, everywhere, in every country around the World.
Because all our decisions, individual decisions, our political decisions, are based upon what we know. Humanity is
nothing but what we know and what we have. And what we have can be replaced, and degrades quickly. And what we know
is everything, and it is our limit of what we can be. So before we embark on any particular political stratagem,
we first have to know where we are because, if we do not know where we are, it is impossible for us to know where
we are going. Likewise, it is impossible to correct abuses unless we know that they are going on.”
[mind determinism~chuen*]
15:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDvfQ5gZ-Jw
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/political-debates/101236-transcript-julian-assange-wikileaks-speech-2010-a.html
+
Steven Levy, 1984′ Hackers:
hacker ethic includes, among others, the following two maxims:
(1) all information should be free;
(2) mistrust authority and promote decentralization.
+
Assange’s philosophy can’t be characterized in terms of left versus right so much as individual versus institution.
In particular, Assange holds that truth, creativity, etc. are corrupted by institutional hierarchies,
or what he calls “patronage networks,” and that much of illegitimate power is perpetuated by the hoarding of information.
; staff
6 fulltime volunteers + 1000 parttime encryption experts
1/10: 5 fulltime + 800 occassionaly, all volunteering
/ medzi nimi musi byt aka dovera!!!
As of June 2009, the site had over 1,200 registered volunteers[5] and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, Phillip Adams, Wang Dan, C. J. Hinke, Ben Laurie, Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, Xiao Qiang, Chico Whitaker and Wang Youcai.
ludia okolo nich: dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, startup company technologists, refugee representatives, ethics and anti-corruption campaigners (former TI head), human rights campaigners, lawyers, cryptographers
Dan, CN, 69 pi 9 ix, najhladanejsi po Tiananmen protestoch 89
Laurie, co-founder of apache, member of openssl, director of open rights group, etc, UK, works with Google London on their projects (security protocol pre html/javascript/css)
Phillip Adams, AU, 39 cn 11 ahau, v teenagi clen comm strany, broadcaster
Xiao Qiang, CN, editor China Digital Times
Whitaker, BR, social justice advocate
Wang Youcai, CN, 66 cn 12 ik, jeden z Tiananmen 89 protest lidrov, v 98 co-founded Dem Party (zakazana), 98-04 sedel v base a po tlaku US pusteny
WikiLeaks does not pay for lawyers, as hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal support have been donated by media organisations such as the Associated Press, The Los Angeles Times, and the National Newspaper Publishers Association.
?! WikiLeaks is planning to add an auction model to sell early access to documents.
; hosting
Pirate Party im v 8/10 ponukla hosting vo svedsku, napr v nato cyberbunkri; dostali DDOS, odisli na amazon; ten ich zrusil; odisli na OVH vo FR
Wikileaks integrates technologies including modified versions of MediaWiki, OpenSSL, FreeNet, Tor, PGP and software of our own design.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_Wikileaks.3F_How_does_Wikileaks_operate.3F
ad Freenet – funguje inak ako torrent, je p2p siet, ale casti dat su po uploade (publisher moze byt potom uplne odpojeny, ako pri torrente) zakryptovane, anonymne rozdistribuovane po hostoch (redundantne), nikto nema cely file, takze nikto nie je zodpovedny za obsah ako celok (ako na torrente, a tiez neni problem s lack of ‘seeds’).
ale problem – Freenet tends to ‘forget’ data which is not retrieved regularly.
While users can insert data into the network, there is no way to delete data. Due to the anonymity, no node knows who is the ‘owner’ of a piece of data. The only way data can be removed is if users don’t request the data.
A data haven is a computer or a network that holds data protected from government action by both technical means (encryption) and location in a country that has either no laws, or poorly-enforced laws restricting use of data and no extradition treaties. HavenCo (centralized) andFreenet (decentralized) are two models of modern-day data havens.
WikiLeaks strongly encouraged postings via Tor because of the strong privacy needs of its users.
bulletproof hosting = WL keeps no logs and uses military-grade encryption to protect sources and other confidential information.
/ na SK to mala hysteria, medzi hekermi default hosting
According to Assange, Switzerland and Iceland are the only countries where WikiLeaks would feel safe to operate.
+ uvazuje o azyle v CH
Author and journalist Whitley Strieber: “Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East.”[32]
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=31640
; economy & aukcie
1/10:
core team sa vie samofinancovat, assange zarobil na nete. How do you and the other four guys who work full time without salaries finance living costs? I have made money in the Internet. So I have enough money to do that, but also not forever. And the other four guys, in the moment they are also able to self-finance.
donations = 10%, ostatne od journalist/tech/lawyers friends. In the moment most of the money comes from the journalists, the lawyers or the technologists who are personally involved. Only about ten percent are from online donations. But that might increase.
za pravnikov nikdy neplatili, vsetky spory vyhrali. We don’t have to pay for our lawyer’s time. Hundred of thousands or millions dollars’ worth of lawyer time are being donated. But we still have to pay things like photocopying and court filing. And so far we have never lost a case, there were no penalties or compensations to pay.
pravnikov maju od AP, LA Times, NNA. At the bottom of the site is a list of your “steadfast supporters”, media organisations and companies like AP, Los Angeles Times or The National Newspaper Association. What do they do for you? They give their lawyers, not cash.
nema problem s platenim ich zdrojov – preco by mali profitovat len novinari a pravnici? (by to riesili napr cez belgicko, ktore chrani media zdroje, vratane bank) Actually we would have no problem giving sources cash. We don’t do that, but for me there is no reason why only the lawyers and the journalists should be compensated for their effort.
the more evidence there is of some scandal and the more important the scandal, the less likely it is that the press will write about it. If there is no exclusivity.
aukcna nocna mora vo venezuele
(hovori o tom ako si mozu byt wl isti ze dane medium o tej story napise)
If you have an auction and a media organisation pays the most, then they are predicting, that they will benefit the most from publishing the story. That is, they will have the maximum number of readers. So this is a very good way to measure who should have the exclusivity. We tried to do it as an experiment in Venezuela .
Why Venezuela?
Because of the character of the document. We had 7 000 e-mails from Freddy Balzan, he was Hugo Chavez’s former speech writer and also the former ambassador to Argentinia. We knew that this document would have this problem, that it was big and political important, therefore probably no one would write anything about it for the reason I just said.
What happened?
This auction proved to be a logistical nightmare. Media organisations wanted access to the material before they went to auction. Consequently we would get them to sign non-disclosure agreements, chop up the material and release just every second page or every second sentence.That proved to distracting to all the normal work we were doing, so that we said, forget it, we can’t do that. We just released the material as normal. And that’s precisely what happened: no one wrote anything at all about those 7 000 Emails. Even though 15 stories had appeared about the fact that we were holding the auction.
You plan to continue the auction idea in the future …
We would actually need a team of five or six people whose job was just to arrange these auctions.
We plan to continue it, but we know it will take more resources. But if we pursue that we will not do that for single documents. We will instead offer a subscription. This would be much simpler. We would only have the overhead of doing the auction stuff every three months or six months, and not for every document.
+
15:19 < barak> hmm, tak mame to tu, cryptome’s john young’s hatred kampan o tom
ze wl su knowledge industry banda ma zazemie
15:20 < barak> akurat to je trochu ploche tvrdenie
15:21 < barak> wl sa obhajuju tym, ze tym media prinutia o storke nakoniec
napisat
15:21 < ach> to je tiez trochu ploche tvrdenie :)
15:21 < barak> prve si kupi exkluzivny early access
15:22 < barak> a ked nenapise, vyhodilo zbytocne peniaze
15:22 < barak> co ma ale vela slabin
15:22 < barak> takato logika
15:22 < ach> ved vravim
15:22 < ach> to je podla mna skor chaba racionalizacia
15:22 < ach> ako realny plan :)
15:23 < barak> ktovie ci to riesili pri cablegate. tvrdia ze nie. ak nie,
podarilo sa im vytvorit model kedy msg gets delivered
15:23 < barak> bez nutnosti aukcie
15:24 < barak> zaroven ohlasili ze stransparentnia svoj cashflow
+
este k aukcnemu modelu:
So the exclusivity of the story will run out after three months?
No, there will be exclusivity in terms of different time windows in access to the material. As an example: there will be an auction for North America. And you will be ranked in the auction. The media organisation which bids most in the auction would get access to it first, the one who bids second will get access to it second and so on. Media organisations would have a subscription to Wikileaks.
Let’s imagine there are only two companies in the auction. And one pays double what the other one pays. And let’s say the source says they want the document to be published in one month’s time. So there is a one month window where the journalists have time to investigate and write about the material. The organisation that pays the most for it gets it immediately, so therefore they would be able to do a more comprehensive story. Then the organisation that pays half as much gets it half the time later, they get the documents two weeks later. And then after one month they both publish.
But all in all I think we only would have to have a few bid cases per year, that would be enough to finance it.
15:31 < barak> rozhovor robili v case ked bol wl myslim dokonca dole, alebo
siel dole [ano, potvrdene v prvej otazke rozhovoru]. vzapati ale zacali chodit donations ake predtym
nechodili. co asi teoreticky vyriesilo problem pokrytia
operational costs
^ http://stefanmey.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/leak-o-nomy-the-economy-of-wikileaks/
; wl – knowledge that + how (via epistemology)
diplomaticke kable a dalsie leaky, skratka wikileaks nam davaju nielen truths, ale aj knowledge how..
vela veci boli doteraz beliefs, no povrdili sa, a stali sa poznanim.
wikileaks mali pred 2010 problem vytvorit mesidzom impact lebo ponukali iba truth… neponukali belief… (??)
no poznanie potrebuje byt okrem pravdou aj vierou, ludia mu musia verit. (??)
no a vdaka pritomnosti v mienkotvornych mediach nabrali aj belief value. a stali sa poznanim.
guardian outsourcol pravdu na wikileaks, wikileaks zase vieru na guardian (??)
?? nie je ale viera moc klasicke vnimanie poznania?
+
druhu vec ktoru nam wl davaju je ‘poznanie ako’ (via foucault). vieme o tom ze al-dzazira je relativne nezavisla telka,
dnes vieme aj to, ze scasti zavisla je, a aj ako. je kontrolovana katarskou vladou.
+
a acquaintance-knowledge?
; text-based impact
zarazajuce je ze spravili taky impact cisto s texom….
video je silnejsie – na tom zas stal collateral murder (tu redefinovali vyznam pojmu ‘collateral damage’).
tymto sa spustila lavina zaujmu. ich znacka vyrazne profitovala.
; internetovy technokomunista
/ komentar na zunguzungu (clanok wikileaks now) ze nechape preco nevie autor spravit link medzi manifestom a ich dnesnou taktikou.
his ideology is concocted generally from the readily available ideology of Internet technocommunism.
? There isn’t anything “capitalistic” or “market-oriented” or “libertarian” about what he says, as capitalism isn’t “better” if its trade secrets are destroyed, just like government didn’t get “better” by having its cables exposed.
/ ==>> takze mu je ukradnuty trh aj kapitalizmus aj stat ktory zavisi na obchodnych tajomstvach??
he isn’t for transparency so much as “justice”. “Justice” is Bolshevism — it’s justice as he sees, with code as law, and the coder as the most powerful. The hacker runs everything…because he *can*.
That’s *his* justice, which isn’t even frontier justice, but the Bolshevik “revolutionary expediency”.
it’s all destructive, to make a situation of “the worse, the better,” so that he can proclaim victory of the web over old organic institutions.
Wikileaks, Now
== oh no! alebo mysli to ironicky? term that in fact Kevin Kelly of Wired and AJ Keen have used in describing the phenomenon of Web 2.0 quite apart from me.
tiez: “Free” to 4-chan to the TED cult to Tim O’Reilly
transhumanist/singularist/technoutopian/whatever ideas bound up in software production
rightwing kritika z pozicie: “code-as-law” is a threat to human rights, not a realization or an improvement of them / ale nepisal o tom aj Lessig?
WikiLeaks is Bolshevism. It’s not about reform or about some noble advocacy. It’s about nihilistic destruction.
ad scientific journalism – As if an “original document” is somehow “scientific”. As if any of these cables can really be understood, shorn of their context.
http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2010/12/christopher-schwartz-censors-my-comment-about-wikileaks-.html
/ ako ju vyvratit? neni wl fakt net technokomunizmus?
/ pojem pravdy u assange – tym trpim.. by som potreboval nastudovat foucaulta a uz nevladzem
Lovink&Riemens: wl is deeply shaped by 1980s hacker culture, combined with the political values of techno-libertarianism that emerged in the 1990s.
this brand of idealism (or, if you prefer, anarchism) is paired with a preference for conspiracies, an elitist attitude and a cult of secrecy (never mind condescension).
This is not conducive to collaboration with like-minded people and groups, who are relegated to being the simple consumers of WikiLeaks output.
The missionary zeal to enlighten the idiotic masses and “expose” the lies of government, the military and corporations is reminiscent of the well-known (or infamous) media-culture paradigm from the 1950s.
http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/geert/2010/12/07/twelve-theses-on-wikileaks-with-patrice-riemens/
; centralised group + wl as conspirators too
Assange, as the original designer of WikiLeaks, envisions this entity as a conspiracy to fight conspiracies.
+
Isn’t it strange that in Assange’s view, the decentralized acephalic network as the structure of authoritarianism? Almost as if the positions have been reversed. Not only is he philosophically not a hacker, for him the problem is effectively that government is controlled by hackers.
Daniel Domscheit-Berg, another former member who left recently, seems to endorse the standard anarchist view in interviews. This might mean that Assange is partly acting pragmatically – trying out ideas like crowdsourcing and then discarding them when they fail – but the failures also cause him to hew closer to his own principles, and this means jettisoning members who fail to adapt.
If Assange logic/ratuonality is moving to a hacker based logic/rationality to an “institutional” media one, this implies that sooner or later Wikileaks will be affected by a Secrecy/Conspirative/Authoritarian logic/rationality.
the danger for Wikileaks and assange is to be devoured by the Monster they are fighting for.
koment zo zunguzungu
; journalism
Lovink & Riemens: Assange and his collaborators refuse to be labelled in terms of “old categories” (journalists, hackers, etc.) and claim to represent a new Gestalt on the world information stage.
Traditional investigative journalism used to consist of three phases: unearthing facts, crosschecking these and backgrounding them into an understandable discourse. WikiLeaks does the first, claims to do the second, but omits the third completely.
; ANONYMOUS
*2006 Habbo raid (niektori oznacuju 2003-2007 ako zlatu eru 4chan)
sli proti cenzure, scientologom, teraz aj za free speech
“loose coalition of Internet denizens”
“doing it for the lulz”
[Anonymous is] the first internet-based superconsciousness. Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group. How do you know they’re a group? Because they’re travelling in the same direction. At any given moment, more birds could join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely.
—Landers, Chris, Baltimore City Paper, April 2, 2008.
Operation:Payback
In 2010, several Bollywood companies hired Aiplex Software to launch DDoS attacks on websites that did not respond to software takedown notices.[71] Piracy activists then created Operation Payback in September 2010 in retaliation.[71] The original plan was to attack Aiplex Software directly, but upon finding some hours before the planned DDoS that another individual had taken down the firm’s website on their own, Operation Payback moved to launching attacks against the websites of copyright stringent organisations, Law firms and other websites.[72] This grew into multiple DDoS attacks against anti-piracy groups and law firms.
shifted to wikileaks
utoky na:
– paypalblog.com
– paypal.com – frozen 60k eur
– Operation:Payback – postfinance.ch, which frozen 31k eur
– related to 4chan, 711chan, ED, irc channels, youtube, etc… predtym scientology, etc
Shaviro (2003): Connected
paste z: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt
(from /not)
Cyberspace is what Deleuze
and Guattari call a “haptic” space, as opposed to an optical
one: a space of “pure connection,” accessible only to “closerange
vision,” and having to be navigated “step by step. . . .
One never sees from a distance in a space of this kind, nor
does one see it from a distance”.
No panoramic
view is possible, for the space is always folding, dividing,
expanding, and contracting. [nema zmysel robit vizualne komplexne webstranky – len tolko co clovek
vie cele prijat, v pozadi socialna navigacia, takze ‘listujem’ dalej
Time is flexible on the Net as
well; things happen at different speeds. Sometimes I must
read and type extremely fast to keep up with rapid-fire chat
room conversations. Other times I have to hold myself back
as I wait for pages or files to download.
What’s more, these
multiple speeds, times, and spaces overlap. Enveloped in
the network, I am continually being distracted.
I can no
longer concentrate on just one thing at a time. My body is
pulled in several directions at once, dancing to many distinct
rhythms. My attention fragments and multiplies as I
shift among the many windows on my screen. Being online
always means multitasking.
haptic space
=
a haptic vision of color, as opposed to the optical vision of light. What Deleuze calls haptic vision is precisely this “sense” of colors. The tactile-optical space of representation presents a complex eye-hand relation: an ideal optical space that nonetheless maintains virtual referents to tactility (depth, contour, relief). From this, two types of subordination can occur: a subordination of the hand to the eye in optical space (Byzantine art), and a strict subordination of the eye to the hand in a manual space (Gothic art). But what Deleuze, following Riegl, terms haptic space (from the Greek verb aptõ, to touch) is a space in which there is no longer a hand-eye subordination in either direction. It implies a type of seeing distinct from the optical, a close-up viewing in which “the sense of sight behaves just like the sense of touch.”
http://www.upress.umn.edu/excerpts/Deleuze.html
+
art historian Alois Riegl (1927) on early Roman art particularly textiles. Riegl’s work has been taken up by critical theorists to explore the specificity of cinema and digital media. In Thousand Plateaus Deleuze and Guattari appropriate Riegl’s term to describe a notion of space that is contingent, close up, and short term lacking a fixed point of reference. Haptic space for Deleuze and Guattari, may be visual, tactile and auditory
+
It is not about the all-encompassing (optical) view, but the micro-level (haptic) variation, which suggests orientation and negotiation that is articulated step by step, at a local level (Rebelo).
http://spacecollective.org/Wildcat/6065/Gilles-Deleuze-Francis-Bacon-the-Logic-of-Sensation-pt-2
thacker’s shaviro’s connected review
“Reach out and touch someone? It’s the worst thing that could happen to you”.
Connected is arranged as a series of short segments, each with a title, and each running between one to three pages. There is no one theoretical or narrative thread in Connected, but many. Methodologically, Shaviro uses science fiction as a way of gaining a novel, critical understanding of our current network society.
For Shaviro, science fiction is the only social theory capable of comprehending the many reversals that new media offer.
In his discussion of Bruce Sterling’s novel, Distraction, Shaviro notes the fine line between attentive multitasking
and the McLuhanesque “cool media” of total media distraction. In a way, Connected is Shaviro’s attempt to explore
this boundary. We might even call it the “critical theory of distraction.”
http://www.leonardo.info/reviews/apr2004/connect_thacker.html
Barok (2010): Tactics of leaking and politics of the common
+ research:
http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/index.php/Tactics_of_leaking_and_politics_of_the_common
Grounded Theory
via guy
nie hypoteza a dokazat ju, nie generalizovat, ale deskriptivne, opisat to co clovek vidi
a potom for ideas ktore emerged from the descriptions
neutekat za velkymi teoriami, ale drzat sa tych malych ktore vyvstavaju z mojich opisov
nemat na zaciatku kategorie, ale mat len descriptions, a z nich kategorie
generation of theory from data in the process of conducting research ~ pocas monoskop vyskumu som mal o vsetkom blogovat a mali mi vyvstavat otazky a male teorie
zo social sciences pochadza
“reverse engineered hypothesis” :)
by Glaser & Strauss, 1967, sociologists
In a way GT resembles what many researchers do when retrospectively formulating new hypotheses to fit data. However, in GT the researcher does not pretend to have formulated the hypotheses in advance since preformed hypotheses are prohibited.
Glaser: all is data
GT has the goal of generating concepts that explain people’s actions regardless of time and place. The descriptive parts of a GT are there mainly to illustrate the concepts.
If your research goal is accurate description, then another method should be chosen since GT is not a descriptive method. Instead it has the goal of generating concepts that explain people’s actions regardless of time and place. The descriptive parts of a GT are there mainly to illustrate the concepts.
In most behavioral research endeavors persons or patients are units of analysis, whereas in GT the unit of analysis is the incident.
When comparing many incidents in a certain area, the emerging concepts and their relationships are in reality probability statements.
A GT is never right or wrong, it just has more or less fit (ako blizko maju koncepty k udalostiam ktore reprezentuju), relevance, workability and modifiability.
GT is not concerned with data accuracy as in descriptive research but is about generating concepts that are abstract of time, place and people.
1. all is data
2. open / substantive coding – poznamky k naskumanym udalostiam, riadok po riadku, opakovane zgrupit do konceptov a tie porovnavat s udalostami a refinovat ich
3. selective coding – nan prist ked som nasiel ‘tentative core’ (core variable), potom core guiding my coding. nevsimat si moc koncepty ktore sa jadra a podjadier netykaju. teda theoretical sampling – deduktivna cast GT
4. theoretical codes – pogrupovat fragmentarne koncepty do hypotez
5. memoing – core stage of GT. “Memos are the theorizing write-up of ideas about substantive codes and their theoretically coded relationships as they emerge during coding, collecting and analyzing data, and during memoing”. Memoing is total creative freedom without rules of writing, grammar or style.
6. sorting – memos are sorted, which is the key to formulate the theory for presentation to others. lots of new ideas emerge, which in turn are recorded in new memos
7. writing – The theoretical density should be dosed so concepts are mixed with description in words, tables, or figures to optimize readability. In the later rewriting the relevant literature is woven in to put the theory in a scholarly context.
No pre-research literature review [naive? risk of rediscovering the theories]. The literature shThis leads to a research practice where data sampling, data analysis and theory development are not seen as distinct and disjunct, but as different steps to be repeated until one can describe and explain the phenomenon that is to be researched. This stopping point is reached when new data does not change the emerging theory anymore.ould instead be read in the sorting stage being treated as more data to code and compare with what has already been coded and generated.
No taping (and transcribing) interviews – waste of time. staci field-noting interviews.
No talk. Talking about the theory before it is written up drains the researcher of motivational energy. Talking about the GT should be restricted to persons capable of helping the researcher without influencing her final judgments.
The research principle behind grounded theory is neither inductive nor deductive, but combines both in a way of abductive reasoning (coming from the works of Charles Sanders Peirce).
This leads to a research practice where data sampling, data analysis and theory development are not seen as distinct and disjunct, but as different steps to be repeated until one can describe and explain the phenomenon that is to be researched. This stopping point is reached when new data does not change the emerging theory anymore.
kandidati na primatora BA 2010
Hlina 70 li 1 caban VIII lipt.mikulas, občiansky aktivista a podnikateľ, ako nezávislý.
Vasaryova 48 vi 13 oc VII, Poslankyňa Bratislavského samosprávneho kraja, za stredopravú koalíciu SDKÚ, SaS, KDH, Most-Híd a OKS
Ftacnik 56 sc 8 men XIII, Úradujúci starosta Petržalky, ako nezávislý, s podporou Smeru
Budaj 52 aq 2 ben* V, mestský poslanec, za BA koalíciu Zmena zdola, Demokratickú úniu a Demokratickú stranu
/ moderuje blascak 1 oc IX (debata @a4 zajtra)
Youtube Guggenheim 2010
They comprise the ultimate YouTube playlist: a selection of the most unique, innovative, groundbreaking video work being created and distributed online during the past two years.
12:21 < barak> pash u googenheima http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmPKT4qTrQY
12:24 < ach> barak: tie posledne dve su super
12:30 < ach> barak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DVN4m41QCE&feature=player_embedded#! super
komentare od cechov :)
12:34 < pht_> j tak to uz len otazka casu kym dostane ‘best new track’ na
spomalene shangaan electro
12:35 < pht_> hajpa hajpa
12:39 < barak> milos vojtechovsky: dobre, i kdyz ta guggenheimova soutez vypada
jako uplna kravina, jak se prave ujistuji
12:48 < ach> barak: samotne su tie videa fajn, len nerozumiem o co presne im
ide :)
12:51 < barak> videam alebo organizatorom akcie?
12:52 < ach> organizatorom
12:52 < barak> hierarchizovat horizontalny obsah
12:52 < barak> via modernisticka idea umenia
12:53 < barak> ako vrcholu spolocenskej aktivity
12:54 < barak> a vyberom youtube platformy legitimizovat svoje biele steny pre
21. storocie )
12:55 < ach> palo ti dal preprint svojho clanku na tuto temu?
12:55 < barak> vsetky tri strany (umelci, youtube aj guggenheim) maju myslim
celkom lahko citatelne dovody..
12:55 < barak> pise? nedal, vsak daj
12:55 < ach> pardon, to bol zart!
12:55 < barak> aha haha
12:55 < barak> ci co sa da ine o tom mysliet?
12:56 < ach> neviem, mozme skusit alternativnu interpretaciu podla toho kto je
v porote
12:57 < ach> laurie anderson a animal collective si hladaju novych reziserov
pre videoklipy
12:57 < ach> aronofsky potrebuje kameramana
12:57 < barak> v porote nejake nezname mena vyznamnych kuratorov
12:58 < barak> to by nesli cez guggenheim
Bennett
Bennett iview, 2010
=
your student’s question: “How can we account for something like iterable structures in an assemblage theory?” is exactly the right question. I’m working on it!
(ale deleuze to tam ma popisane)
+
problem vytvarania podobnosti:
it is easy to get carried away and 1) forget that analogies are slippery and often misleading because they can highlight (what turn out to be) insignificant or non-salient-to-the-task-at-hand resemblances, 2) forget that your body-and-its-operations is not an ideal or pinnacle of evolution, but just the body you have; 3) forget that the human body is itself a composite of many different it-bodies, including bacteria, viruses, metals, etc. and that when we recognize a resemblance between a human form and a nonhuman one, sometimes the connecting link is a shared inorganicism. I think that anthropomorphizing can be a valuable technique for building an ecological sensibility in oneself, but of course it is insufficient to the task.
+
I also suggest that a heightened sensitivity to the agency of assemblages could translate into a national politics that was not so focused around a juridical model of moral responsibility, blame, and punishment.
Bennett, Edible Matter
=
In this essay, I seek to bring to the fore this vital power as it exists within
nonhuman ‘actants’.3 Bruno Latour defines an actant as ‘something that
acts or to which activity is granted by others. It implies no special motivation
of human individual actors, nor of humans in general.’4 Proceeding
from this definition, I will horizontalize the relations between humans,
biota and abiota—presenting all of them as actors vying for efficacy.
Zizek (2010): liberal multiculturalism
Until recently, two main parties@Eur: a right-of-centre party (Christian Democrat, liberal-conservative, people’s) and a left-of-centre party (socialist, social-democratic); then smaller parties (ecologists, communists).
There is now one predominant centrist party that stands for global capitalism, usually with a liberal cultural agenda (for example, tolerance towards abortion, gay rights, religious and ethnic minorities). Opposing this party is an increasingly strong anti-immigrant populist party which, on its fringes, is accompanied by overtly racist neofascist groups.
PL (Tusk’s christdem lib conserv Civic Platform 42% vs Kaczynski’s national conserv Christian Law & Justice 32, 10/07),
NL (Rutte’s cons lib VVD 21% vs Wilders’ right populist PVV 16 vs Cohen’s socdem PvdA 20, 7/10),
NO (Stoltenberg’s socdem Labour 32% vs Jensen’s populist lib Progress 22 vs Solberg’s lib cons Conservative 14, 9/05) – ale lava vlada,
SW (Sahlin’s SocDem 31% vs Reinfeldt’s lib conserv Moderate Party 31, potom daleko nic, 9/10),
HU (Orban’s conserv christdem national Fidesz 53% vs Vona’s radical nationalist Jobbik 17 vs Mesterhazy’s socdem MSZP 17, potom len pod 10, 4/10)
we are entering a new epoch in which crisis – or, rather, a kind of economic state of emergency, with its attendant need for all sorts of austerity measures (cutting benefits, diminishing health and education services, making jobs more temporary) is permanent. Crisis is becoming a way of life.
After 1990 we entered a new era in which the predominant form of the exercise of state power became a depoliticised expert administration and the co-ordination of interests. The only way to introduce passion into this kind of politics, the only way to actively mobilise people, is through fear: the fear of immigrants, the fear of crime, the fear of godless sexual depravity, the fear of the excessive state (with its burden of high taxation and control), the fear of ecological catastrophe, as well as the fear of harassment (political correctness is the exemplary liberal form of the politics of fear).
What is increasingly emerging as the central human right in late-capitalist societies is the right not to be harassed, which is the right to be kept at a safe distance from others.
The contemporary redefinition of politics as the art of expert administration as politics without politics? This leads us to today’s tolerant liberal multiculturalism as an experience of the Other deprived of its Otherness – the decaffeinated Other.
After righteously rejecting direct populist racism as “unreasonable” and unacceptable for our democratic standards, they endorse “reasonably” racist protective measures: “We grant ourselves permission to applaud African and east European sportsmen, Asian doctors, Indian software programmers. We don’t want to kill anyone, we don’t want to organise any pogrom. But we also think that the best way to hinder the always unpredictable violent anti-immigrant defensive measures is to organise a reasonable anti-immigrant protection.” barbarism with a human face. It reveals the regression from the Christian love of one’s neighbour back to the pagan privileging of our tribe versus the barbarian Other.