not

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

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.

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.

STANDARDY, SLUZBY

= preco tie veci vznikli a co bol pre ne impulz a co sa riesilo pri ich vzniku

+ nelson–chcel kliky za kredity

+ gnu–odpoved na to, ked apple zacal distribuovat SW bez zdrojakov (dovtedy otvoreny kod–SW sa nepredaval)

+ email

+ bbs

+ html
========1993=========

+ www–Lee v CERNe od 89, naplno v 93 po spoplatneni Gophera a s launchom grafickeho Mosaicu (vyvinuli v labe v Illinois vdaka Goreovmu grantu)=>top inet protokol, potom *94 W3C v MIT (ked Lee odisiel z CERNu; s podporou DARPA a EU)

========1995/96=========

+ php–v 94 Lendorf (4 etznab XII, gronec, v 93 skoncil system engineering vo Waterloo), povodne na jeho homepage (Personal Home Page)–kde PHPckom (v Ccku) nahradil Perl skript, ktorym updatoval svoje CV a navstevnost, neskor pridal databazy a dynamiku, v lete 95 to pustil von na debugging, PHP license (compatible w/ GPL), spravil prve 2 verzie, potom prebrali vedenie vyvoja izraelci Gutmans a Suraski, v 97 prepisali parser, a neskor aj jadro, potom zalozili Zend

+ mysql–vyvijany svedskou firmou MySQL AB–teraz pod Sun, ktory vlastni copyright na vacsinu jadra(?), ale je pod GPL, prva verzia v 95. v praxi: drupal, joomla!, wordpress, mediawiki, flickr, facebook, google, youtube
+ apache–webserver, najprv McCool ktory robil pre NCSA HTTPd (v Illinois), odkial odisiel v polke 94, dalej nadviazali patchmi dalsi koderi, ktori neskor vytvorili Apache Group, skupina ho volala “a patchy server”. prva verzia v 95, povodne alternativa k Netscape webserveru (dnes Sun Java webserver), od 96 najpopularnejsi webserver na www, v Ccku, dnes 50% vsetkych webov. vlastna (Apache) licencia, ktora neni kompatibilna s GPL. Apache Group presla v 99 na neziskovku Apache SW Foundation (“decentralized community of developers”, meritocracy, ApacheCon kazdy rok).

+ css–pocas vzniku w3c, 9 navrhov na w3c liste, presli dva–dvaja nori (Lie+Bos) sa spojili (jeden je top v Opere, druhy CSS/W3C), rozvijane vo working grupe v w3c, launch v 95, ale plny adapt do browsrov az v 00, css2 98 (ma positioning) stale neni plny

+ javascript–typek v Netscape, 95, Netscape ho spustil s javou

+ xml–je specifikacia pre tvorbu vlastnych markup jazykov(xhtml,rss,atd), od late 80s SGML, do W3C to v 95 priniesol Dan Connolly, od mid-96 Bosak v Sune sa obklopil ludmi zo SGML aj webu, zrobila ho 11-clenna skupina (len emaily a teleconf) + 150 poradna skupina, hlavni editori Tim Bray (6 cauac 55) a Michael Sperberg-McQueen, prva verzia v 96, W3C ho spustila v 98
+ google–Brin(7 oc* VIII 73 le, rodicia vedci emigrovali z Ruska ked mal 6yr lebo otec Zid, montessori ZS, comp sci+math Bc Maryland, v 95 comp sci MA Stanford)+Page(2 ik I 73 ar, syn pocitacoveho vedca a programatorky, matka Zidovka, montessori ZS, comp eng BC Michigan, v 95 comp sci MA Stanford, v PhD riesil linkovanie na webe–s ohladom na akademicke citacie), stretli sa ako PhD studaci v 95 na Stanforde, vymysleli PageRank alg pre urcovanie dolezitosti stranok, napisali spolu zasadny paper “The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine”, a v 96 prva verzia googla–na webe Stanfordu, Google inc *98, v 01 najali noveho sefa Schmidta, Brin je proti cenzure v cinskom Googli. rozbehli 00 Adwords, 04 Gmail, 06 Google Maps, 07 Google Reader, 08 Google Chrome. kupili 03 Blogger, 03+07 AdSense (3 mld), 04 Picasa, 06 Google Docs, 06 Youtube (1.6 mld), 07 Jaiku.
========1999=========

+ blogy/blogger/blogspot/livejournal–Brad Fitzgerald (12 lamat* 80 aq, MA comp sci Seattle) spustil LiveJournal (FLOSS, podobna WELLu, ma SNS featury) v 3/99 aby jeho SS-spoluziaci vedeli co robi, v 05 predal firmu pre Six Apart, z tej odisiel v 07, teraz je v Googli; slovo+sloveso blog (z “we-blog”) spopularizovala firma Pyra Labs (Evan Williams–6 ik XI 72 ar, podnikatel, zije v SF; spolu s Meg Hourihan–spoluzakladatelka–Kottkeho zena & Paul Bausch–koder)–v 8/99 spustili servis Blogger–najprv uplne free a no revenue model, az firme vyschli vrecka, z-ci robili mesiace zadara, az nastal masovy odchod (vratane Hourihan), a nechali v tom Williamsa sameho, podrzala ho investicia z Trellixu, potom spustil advertising-supported Blogspot a Blogger Pro, v 02 kompletne prepisany kod, aby ho mohli licencovat inym firmam; v 03 ich kupil Google–vtedy mala firma 6 ludi, v 04 odtial Williams odisiel a zalozil firmu Odeo (podcasting), potom Obvious–tam aj Twitter
+ rss (vs typek z OAI)–99-01 ho spravil Guha v Netscape pre ich web, ale novy majitel AOL to vyhodil, potom komplikovane, tri subjekty to riesili paralelne (Winer/UserLand+Berkman Center, RSS-DEV[Guha]+O’Reilly, Atom), rss2 v 02, oranz.ikona od 05 v browsroch

========2003=========

+ trackback/backlinks–s trackbackom prisiel Movable Type v 02, nepodporuje ho Blogger (ten ma backlinks–which allow users to employ Google’s search infrastructure to show links between blog entries–??)

+ wordpress–povodne b2\cafelog–written in PHP+MySQL by Michel Valdrighi, potom par mesiacov vypadok vyvoja, v 03 sa ho chopil Mullenweg (4 akbal* III 84 cp, artova SS–hra na jazzovy saxik, v 04 spustil Ping-O-Matic ktory informuje search enginy o blog updatoch, v 04 odisiel z VS v Houstone do SF robit pre CNET–tam do 05, v 05 vypustil Akismet proti comment/trackback spamu, v 05 zalozil firmu Automattic), k nemu sa hned pripojil Mike Little, a potom aj sam Valdrighi, WordPress *03, v 03 na nom bezi 2000 blogov, v 04 je Movable Type spoplatnena (neskor to Six Apart olutovali a vratili sa ku GPL), ludia masovo prechadzaju na WordPress, v 06 prva WP conf v style Barcamp
+ myspace–lahky upload mp3, zrobilo ho par z-cov eUniverse po spusteni Friendstera v 02, mali za chrbtom firmu takze nemali start-up probs; the project was overseen by Brad Greenspan (eUniverse’s Founder, Chairman, CEO), who managed Chris DeWolfe (66, MySpace’s starting CEO), Josh Berman, Tom Anderson (71, MySpace’s starting president, Bc rhetorics+english Berkeley, MA film-critical studies LA, “Tom”–to je asi len PR tah), and a team of programmers and resources provided by eUniverse. snazili sa razit mytus o garazovej firme, ale bola to premyslena PR kampan na prebratie Friendstera. The very first MySpace users were eUniverse employees; the company held contests to see who could sign-up the most users; the company then used its resources to push MySpace to the masses. eUniverse used its 20 million users and e-mail subscribers to quickly breathe life into MySpace, and move it to the head of the pack of social networking websites; a key architect was tech expert __Toan Nguyen__ who helped stabilize the MySpace platform when Brad Greenspan asked him to join the team. spusteny v 03, v 05 ich kupil News Corp (Murdoch)–ziskali tiez kontrolu nad adminovym/”Tom”ovym accountom; v 06 Greenspan vydal “MySpace Report”–“News Corp’s acquisition of MySpace as is one of the largest merger and acquisition scandals in U.S. history” & News Corp should have valued MySpace at US$20 billion rather than US$327 million; v 6/06 najpopularnejsi SNS v USA, dnes 300 z-cov, HQ v Beverly Hills (spolu s Foxom), v 06 UK verzia, neskor cinska. http://www.valleywag.com/tech/myspace/myspace-the-business-of-spam-20-exhaustive-edition-199924.php

+ last.fm–02, audioscrobbler–projekt Richarda Jonesa na comp sci skole v Southamptone, last.fm zacalo v 02 ako internet radio a music community site (Felix Miller, Martin Stiksel, Saulyus Chyamolonskas, Michael Breidenbruecker and Thomas Willomitzer)–useri si mohli customizovat cez love/ban profily, nominovane na Prix AE v 03, last.fm uzko spolupracovalo s audioscrobbler od 03–spolocny ofis vo Whitechapel/London, v 05 zlucili aj sajty, v 06 spustili japoncinu a neskor dalsie jazyky, rozne hudobne ceny, 5/07 ich kupilo CBS Interactive za 280m USD, mgmt team ostal, imeem.com ma ale ovela viac userov. funded from the sale of online advertising space, monthly user subscriptions and donations (prvy dar v 04 od investicneho bankara Petra Gardnera; potom Stefan Glaenzer, Joi Ito, Reid Hoffman; v 06 prvy venture capital od Index Ventures). v 2008 maju 82 z-cov v East London

+ del.icio.us–The precursor to Delicious was Muxway, a link blog that had grown out of a text file that Schachter maintained to keep track of links related to Memepool (*98 multi-autor blog s linkami). founded by Joshua Schachter (74, BS electrical/comp engineer Pittsburgh) in 9/03 and acquired by Yahoo! in 12/05 (30m USD), 5mil+ users v 2008, HQ Santa Clara/California,

========2004=========

+ rubyonrails–was extracted by David Heinemeier Hansson (3 men 79 li, DK, Bc comp sci+biz admin, v 05 odisiel do Chicaga) from his work on Basecamp, a project management tool by 37signals, prvy release v 04, bezi na Mongrel/Apache+CGI/atd, vystup v HMTL aj XML, extensive use of JavaScript libraries Prototype and Script.aculo.us for Ajax, MIT license, od 07 sucast Mac OS X, TM vlastni ten typek a nepusti logo tam kde nema sam prsty
+ gmail–*04, 1gb mail storage,handling mailov podla topicov(na sposob komentarov k clankom)

========2006=========

+ twitter~microblogging–users can receive updates via the Twitter website, SMS, RSS, email or through an application such as Tweetie, TwitterFon, Twitterrific, Feedalizr or Facebook; *06 Founded by Jack Dorsey (koncept), Biz Stone and Evan Williams (Blogger); zacalo ako R&D v Odeone; napisany v Ruby on Rails (kvoli rychlosti zvazovali presun na PHP alebo Javu, ale nakoniec nie), HQ v SF, najprv pouzivali z-ci vnutri firmy Obvious, potom von v 10/06, v 07 firma Twitter–CEO Dorsey–od 08 Williams, EN verzia bez reklam, ale JP verzia je s reklamami, su len 2 jazykove verzie, inonarodne ich predbiehaju
+ flickr–lahky multiupload jpg

+ youtube–dvaja typci z paypal,rychly stream videi

+ (secondlife)
+ flash

+ facebook–v 4/08 predbehol myspace

www

the World Wide Web was begun in 1989 by English scientist Tim Berners-Lee, working at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva, Switzerland. In 1990, he proposed building a “web of nodes” storing “hypertext pages” viewed by “browsers” on a network,[1] and released that web in 1992.

http://www.w3.org/Proposal.html

In March 1989, Berners-Lee wrote a proposal[4] which referenced ENQUIRE and described a more elaborate information management system. With help from Robert Cailliau, he published a more formal proposal (on November 12, 1990) to build a “Hypertext project” called “WorldWideWeb” (one word, also “W3”)[1] as a “web of nodes” with “hypertext documents” to store data.

The proposal had been modeled after EBT’s (Electronic Book Technology, a spin-off from the Institute for Research in Information and Scholarship at Brown University) Dynatext SGML reader that CERN had licensed. The Dynatext system, although technically advanced (a key player in the extension of SGML ISO 8879:1986 to Hypermedia within HyTime), was considered too expensive and with an inappropriate licensing policy for general HEP (High Energy Physics) community use: a fee for each document and each time a document was charged.

By Christmas 1990, Berners-Lee had built all the tools necessary for a working Web:[5] the first Web browser (which was a Web editor as well), the first Web server, and the first Web pages[6] which described the project itself.

facebook
it’s closed system like skype or icq (you have to ‘register’),
but function-wise it is state-of-the-art tool regarding online
communication–it’s instant, and if you decide that you want to
use it for work rather than fun, it provides
pretty well developed collaborative environment:
it’s profile-based (either individual or group or event, etc),
and you post short or long statements or images or videos
(you can also share your calendar for instance),
and get news feed from everyone in your ‘friends’ list.
i want to explore what and (technically) what way you
can export data outside.
saw already many artists, activists and cultural people
use it a lot.
and you dont come into contact with dumb content coming
from people you dont know–only stuff from ‘friends’
is being filtered into your pages (plus horrible ads on
the side).
+
there’s pretty strong users’ pressure in cases when facebook inc
is taking stupid (and very predictable) steps against privacy,
usually they step back.
+
i hate revealing my personal stuff and supporting corporate
services of neoliberals (facebook is as ruthless
as microsoft), same like in case of mobile network providers,
or of skype, or of being hosted by webhosting companies
(in recent years it is better-hosted by friends and transparent
organisations), or of being connected to internet by private
telecom companies..
but emails and messengers and blogs are just not keeping
up with the progress on the side of technical possibilities..
and FLOSS social-networking-applications are only in
very early phases, like http://riseuplabs.org/crabgrass/
or http://elgg.org/ — i installed elgg on Multiplace server,
but it is still very primitive.. they still need several
years for development.. i think of these as the communication
tools at first place (in the context of email/skype/cellphone/
messaging/wiki).. what still remains is a question whether
we want to be creative with this ‘social-web’ craziness in any way..

postava zuckerberga dobre zahrana, storka postavena na dvojitom
sudnom spore, ilustrovanom casovymi vyletmi do zobjektivizovanej
minulosti (teda nie cez pohlady postav), toz fadna, ale nenapadlo
ma ako by sa dal masovy film o fb spravit inak. neadresovana
ochrana sukromia vobec, ani ine user-issues, a zuckerberg
z toho vyliezol ako gates of 2000s – nerdie unsexi college
superkid skyrocketed to ambivalently beloved zillionair (obdivovany
kvoli uspechu, nenavideny kvoli bezohladnosti), akurat tech
turn vystriedany social turnom. filmpostupy po technickej stranke
hromadka klise, washed out hollywood (aj ked psychologizacia
celkom dobre zvladnuta), film som bral viacmenej len
faktograficky ako epizodnu entrepreneurial lekciu z historie
internetu, napr som nevedel ze spoluzakladatel napstru (sean
parker) hral vo fb rolu – zohnal im prvu angel investiciu,
vytlacil z pozicie financneho riaditela s ktorym zuckerberg
fb rozbiehal, a pritiahol ich z cambridge do SF

zuckerberg vyviazol dobre, v podstate mu su
priznane len tri zakopnutia – uvodne fiasko s univerzitnym
webom hodnotenia atraktivity spoluziacok; prebratie idey
harvard-based socialnej siete od trojice harvard studentov;
a podraz svojho ‘jedineho priatela’ v opantani parkerom…
etickych/moralnych preslapov musel pri takej skale projektu
ale spravit ovela viac, hadam aj zavaznejsich.

plus gycova pointa – chalan ktory rozbehol siet s 500 mil
uzivatelmi mal jedineho priatela ktoreho podrazil a s ktorym
sa sudi; a stale tuzi po svojej laske ktoru verejne pospinil.

v podstate pomerne predvidatelne

———–

mark zuckerberg 84 ta 10 cimi [hra ho 83 li 10 chicchan].
Mother psychiatrist, father dentist. Parents Jewish, he considers himself an atheist.
eduardo saverin 82 pi 4 ahau. CFO. Chceli ho zodrat z 34 na 0.03, nakoniec vlastni 5%.
His father in export+real estate. Jew. S markom friends ako freshman. *fb ako sophomore, leto po zalozeni – hadka. [hra ho 3 cauac VIII]
sean parker 79 sa 13 kan VI. Napster spustil rok po skonceni strednej skoly (Fanningova [3 etznab sa 80] idea, Parker sa kvoli tomu
prestahoval za nim do SF, to bol prvykrat mimo domu vobec. ale aj na wikipedii zahmlene, zoznamili sa online ked mal Fanning 15,
Parker 14, pocas procesov ho z firmy vytlacili Fanningovi pravnici), predtym v 16tich odsudeny na communitywork za hacking.
Kodovat ho ucil otec od 7yr. S FB len cca rok dlha epizoda – od leta 04, vytlacil Saverina, dosadil sa ako President, vyoutoval sa
po kokain party v 05. Predtym v 02 spustil socialweb neskor integrovany do MS Outlooku. Party animal.
Ledva dokoncil hi school, astma od detstva, autodidakt, otec US gov oceanographer, mama TV-ad broker. Zuckerberg s nim vraj stale konzultuje ?!
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/10/sean-parker-201010
[hra ho Timberlake 81 aq 8 lamat I]
peter thiel 67 DE-moved to US – paypal co-founder, prva angel investicia do thefacebook. Chess master. Openly gay. NYC based.
In late 2004, Thiel made a $500,000 angel investment in Facebook for 5.2% of the company.
Thiel is listed as a member of the Steering Committee of The Bilderberg Group.
screenplay: aaron sorkin 61 ge 13 caban, hollywoody pise len, incl a few good men 92
FB++
Gideon Yu (investor, odisiel z FB v 09),
Chris Hughes (koder?, co-founder, 83 sc 10 caban, 12% teraz, v 08 viedol Obamovi online kampan),
Chris Kelly (zodpovedny za privacy policy na FB),
Ted Ullyot (lawyer, od 08, riesi privacy issues),
Dustin Moskovitz (koder! co-founder, teraz vedie tech staff, 6%).

FB shareholders
Mark Zuckerberg owns 24% of the company, Accel Partners owns 10%, Dustin Moskovitz owns 6%, Digital Sky Technologies owns 5%, Eduardo Saverin owns 5%, Sean Parker owns 4%, Peter Thiel owns 3%, Greylock Partners and Meritech Capital Partners own between 1 to 2% each, Microsoft owns 1.3%, Li Ka-shing owns 0.75%, the Interpublic Group owns less than 0.5%, a small group of current and former employees and celebrities own less than 1% each, including Matt Cohler, Jeff Rothschild, California U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, Chris Hughes, and Owen Van Natta, while Reid Hoffman and Mark Pincus have sizable holdings of the company, and the remaining 30% or so are owned by employees, undisclosed number of celebrities, and outside investors

film technicky aj atmosferou genericky washed out hollywood, takze som ho bral viacmenej len faktograficky.
zuckerberg ale dobre zahrany. vysiel z toho dobre, v podstate mu su vo filme priznane len tri zakopnutia – uvodne fiasko s uni webom hodnotenim zien, ukradnutie idei harvard-based socialnej siete (mal povodne iny plan?), a podraz svojho ‘jedineho priatela’ v opantani parkerom, etickych/moralnych preslapov musel ale spravit viac.
o napster typovi som nevedel.
gycova pointa – chalan ktory rozbehol siet s 500 mil uzivatelmi mal jedineho priatela ktoreho podrazil a s ktorym sa sudi; a stale tuzi po svojej laske ktoru verejne pospinil.
lessigova kritika – rola v internetu v uspesnom rychlom raste podcenena – fincher to podla neho nepochopil.
/ fb spusteny zaciatkom 04
? preco musi nakoniec pristupit na vyrovnanie? (RECHECK)
? recenzie na knihu accidental billionaries = vela chyb
? poslal policiu na parkera/kokain zuckerberg?
/ suvislost: v Norsku a Svedsku peoples’ taxes online

zmeskanych uvodnych 15 minut:
In 2003, Harvard University student Mark Zuckerberg gets the idea to create a website to rate the attractiveness of female Harvard undergraduates after his girlfriend Erica Albright breaks up with him. Mark hacks into the databases of various residence halls and downloads pictures and names. Using an algorithm supplied by his best friend Eduardo Saverin, Mark creates a page called “FaceMash”, where male students choose which of two girls is more

attractive.
Mark is punished with six months of academic probation after the traffic to the site crashes parts of Harvard’s network, and becomes vilified among most of Harvard’s female community. However, the popularity of “FaceMash” and the fact that he created it in one night, while drunk, brings him to the attention of Cameron Winklevoss and Tyler Winklevoss, identical twins and members of Harvard’s rowing team, and their business partner Divya Narendra.

11:40 < barak> vcera som videl social network, zuckerberg dobre zahrany, storka
postavena na dvojitom sudnom spore, ilustrovanom casovymi
vyletmi do zobjektivizovanej minulosti (teda nie cez pohlady
postav), toz fadna, ale nenapadlo ma ako by sa dal masovy film o
fb spravit inak. neadresovana ochrana sukromia vobec, ani ine
user-issues, a zuckerberg z toho vyliezol ako gates of 2000s –
nerdie unsexi college superkid skyrocketed to ambivalently
beloved zillionair (obdivovany kvoli uspechu, nenavideny kvoli
bezohladnosti), akurat tech turn vystriedany social turnom.
filmpostupy hromadka klise, film som bral viacmenej len
faktograficky ako epizodnu entrepreneurial lekciu z historie
internetu
11:41 < barak> v podstate komplet predvidatelne
11:42 < wao> zillionair (obdivovany
11:42 < wao> neprislo cele :)
11:42 -!- Irssi: Pasting 5 lines to #tlis.sk. Press Ctrl-K if you wish to do
this or Ctrl-C to cancel.
11:42 < barak> zillionair (obdivovany kvoli uspechu, nenavideny kvoli
bezohladnosti), akurat tech turn vystriedany social turnom.
filmpostupy hromadka klise, film som bral viacmenej len
faktograficky ako epizodnu entrepreneurial lekciu z historie
internetu
11:44 < ach> barak: a boli tam nejake nahe baby?
11:44 < barak> zakladatel napstru snupal lajnu z pupku fanynky
11:45 < barak> inak o nom som nevedel ze hral vo fb rolu
11:45 < barak> parker
11:46 < wao> napster druhykrat spomenuty na tomto chane za relativne kratku
dobu! :)
11:46 < barak> zohnal im prvu angel investiciu, vytlacil z pozicie financneho
riaditela s ktorym zuckerberg fb rozbiehal, a pritiahol ich z
harvardu do SF

Rolling Stone:
The Social Network is the movie of the year. But Fincher and Sorkin triumph by taking it further.
Lacing their scathing wit with an aching sadness, they define the dark irony of the past decade.

Sean Parker:
/
One day—in a scene fictionalized in The Social Network—Parker saw Thefacebook, as it was then known, on the computer of his roommate’s girlfriend, a student at Stanford. (In the movie, he gets his first peek after spending the night with a woman whose name he barely knows.)
^ toto bola dost nasilna nepodarena scena/sposob ako vtiahnut parkera do deja
/
Matt Cohler, who joined Thefacebook shortly after Parker, is awed when he thinks about that pivotal e-mail. “Napster and Facebook are two of the most significant companies in the history of the Internet,” he says, “and in both cases Parker spotted them earlier than anyone—other than the people who invented them.”
/
Parker impulsively flew to New York, where he met Zuckerberg for dinner, and the two quickly bonded. A few months later, in June 2004, they ran into each other on the streets of Palo Alto, where Parker, unemployed (but still driving around in a BMW 5-series), was living with yet another girlfriend.
/
Says Moskovitz (fb co-founder), known for his dry humor, “Sean probably deserves less credit for turning Facebook into what it is than he thinks he does, but also more credit than anybody else thinks he does.”
/
In the financing that Parker negotiated with Thiel, as well as a much larger deal signed seven months later with the Accel Partners venture-capital firm, Parker was able to negotiate for Zuckerberg something almost unheard of in a venture-funded start-up: absolute control for the entrepreneur. Because of that, Zuckerberg, to this day, allocates three of Facebook’s five board seats (including his own). Without that control, Facebook would almost certainly have been sold to either Yahoo or Microsoft, whose C.E.O., Steve Ballmer, offered $15 billion for it in the fall of 2007—only to be met with a blank stare from the then 23-year-old Zuckerberg.
/
On a kiteboarding trip to North Carolina in 2005 he was arrested during a party at his rental house on suspicion of cocaine possession. Though he was never formally charged, some of Facebook’s investors and employees felt Parker could no longer effectively serve as company president. With much anguish, he agreed to depart.
/
divides his nights between a San Francisco apartment and a palatial (rented) New York town house.
/
The Parker of the script is also greedy, which is not Sean Parker’s big issue. More than money, he wants credit and recognition.

I don’t think it’s sustainable, but file sharing is resilient. That part is sustainable if what’s meant is something that will weather bad economies, legal threats, changes in technology, etc. AAAARG probably won’t. But I don’t think it matters; it’s not trying to be the new library. That said, I don’t think it will disappear, I don’t think anything ever does. The word promiscuity for the digital object I think is a really good one.

I think pdf readers are going to be another real problem because they will demonstrate that pdfs are a market, a useful copy of the real thing. (parenthetically, I love when people upload highly personalized scans. I much prefer these to fresh ebooks). As ebook readers demonstrate a market, then sites like AAAARG become intolerable because they sit right in the middle of that market and maybe demonstrate how that market is built through the production of scarcity and highly controlled supply. But like I said it never goes away. People have been scanning and sharing books for a long time.

Verso letter?
My response was “Of course we’ll comply. Cease and desist letters are no joke, especially when backed by 3 million per year in sales.” I’m in the camp that it’s not only about copyright, so I’m not going to refuse to budge. It’s about sharing and exchange of knowledge, so if someone asks that I take it down, I will. But I wish it were the author who would ask. I prefer to think more about the desires of authors and readers. Publishers have other stakes.

There’s obviously nothing natural about property, copyright, restrictions placed on distribution, etc. The kind of sharing that people find themselves wanting to engage in, if it becomes normalized, can suggest possibilities for other ways of thinking about these things (which don’t always rely on cease and desist letters, defensive postures, and territoriality).

That’s why I’m also more enthusiastic about taking a positive approach to all of this – its not about fighting copyright or standing up to publishers or something

act of sharing itself constituted a kind of conversation. Focusing too much on the comments leads to a reductive idea of conversation, although I have visited sites with great comments.

The issues section instead becomes a kind of conversation, because people add texts into other people’s issues. Also it is a way to articulate your own argument through selection, omission, etc. The “shared issues” are less predicated on “here is my collection” and more on “I wish there was this collection, but I don’t know what would go in it”. That moves it to something before the presentation/ exhibition/ publication stage — to the earlier, discursive stage.

From Wikipedia: “small is beautiful” and “make each program do one thing well”.

aaaargu zacali v zime chodit cease&desist listy od roznych
vydavatelov (Verso, Uni of Columbia Press, Macmillan, IMO, atd),
je zaujimave sledovat ako sa situacia vyvija.
tu su dva rozhovory (asi jedine ktore doteraz vznikli) so Seanom
Duckrayom, ktory aaaarg.org rozbehol:
http://blog.sfmoma.org/2009/08/four-dialogues-2-on-aaaarg/
http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl/2010/01/05/small-is-beautiful-a-discussion-with-aaaarg-architect-sean-dockray/

pre zaujimavost – archiv diskusie uzivatelov aaaargu
po cease&desist liste od Macmillan… spolocne prisli s novym
riesenim:
http://mitochondrialvertigo.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/the-aaaar-org-discussion-of-the-macmillan-threat/

co je priznacne, Sean viedol niekolko rokov v Los Angeles galeriu,
ktora sa postupne pretransformovala na otvorene vzdelavacie centrum
The Public School, ktorej odnoze vznikli uz v dalsich styroch
mestach. niektore workshopy ktore robia vzniknu prostrednictvom
‘issues’ ktore vytvaraju uzivatelia aaaargu, takze obe iniciativy
su uzko prepojene. ale vsetko spomina v rozhovoroch.

tu je celkom pekna komparacia niekolkych projektov zdielania
ebooks…

Scanners, collectors and aggregators. On the ‘underground movement’ of (pirated) theory text sharing

dalej, dnes som sa dozvedel o Silent Library, komunite v Madarsku,
ktora skenuje a zdiela knihy. po tlaku od vydavatelov (okolo 2005)
presunuli web do Ruska. kamarat ktory je clenom mi dnes pisal:
12:57 < pht__> vstupom je odporucanie existujuceho clena, predstavenie/dovod, a korektura 1 ocrkovaneho scanu!
12:58 < pht__> velmi uzavreta komunita s vysokou vstupnou barierou, ale je tam hrozne vela “povodneho” obsahu
12:58 < pht__> a hlavne out-of-print madarske knihy
13:00 < pht__> hlavnym problemom vydavatelstiev bolo, ze sa tam shareovali cerstve bestsellery v textovej forme :)))
13:01 < pht__> http://index.hu/tech/net/slp0826/
13:02 < pht__> Only 75 copies in 1000 of a a printed title survive fifty years. Concerning their endurance the electronic books are more vulnerable, but their unrestricted copyable and convertible qualities ensure the eternity for them in the common cultural treasury of mankind – so long as culture exists at all; the Silent Library Project and related enterprises make some contribution to its existence.
13:06 < pht__> tiez to len dal dole admin pod navalom C&D lettrov
13:06 < pht__> tiez pise ze ked mu niekto konkretny napisal, tak knihu odstranil
13:08 < pht__> a vylucili veci z wild-inetu
13:08 < pht__> len vlastne scany/ocrka
13:08 < pht__> a normalne stovky ludi citaju tie veci a opravuju ocr chyby :)
13:13 < pht__> najpopularnejsia kniha je asimovova before foundation po madarsky, s 14000 dloadmi
13:14 < pht__> v top5 je aj madarsky autor s 10k
13:16 < pht__> v slp je okolo 7000 textov
13:21 < pht__> na tomto slp je uzasne, ze tie texty su vsetky opravene+prekontrolovane
13:21 < pht__> ze to nie je len klik klik upload klik
13:22 < pht__> tu je clanok ale neda sa to moc citat
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A//index.hu/tech/net/slp0826/&hl=en&langpair=auto|en&tbb=1&ie=UTF-8
13:23 < pht__> vzniklo to ze si chalan naskenoval par knih a dal ich online
13:23 < pht__> a par kamosov zacalo posielat scany tiez
13:23 < pht__> sa pise v tom clanku

skoda ze mi nevyslo sa v Prahe stretnut s Kennethom z ubu.com,
ale ten ma k teme tiez vela co povedat..
napr:
Goldsmith’s syllabus includes Uncreative Writing, Interventionist Writing and Writing Through Art and Culture in partnership with the Institute of Contemporary Art, Philadelphia. Class tools are appropriation, theft, stealing, plundering and sampling. Cheating, fraud and identity theft are all encouraged. For Goldsmith the classroom, is a free space into which ethical queries can be conducted in a safe environment.

ad statna hymna a vlastenectvo by id adam
(moja verzia – prababka)
http://kyberia.sk/id/5210889
korene sú jasné. Slovenská intelektuálna elita sa voči vlastenectvu vymedzila už na začiatku, keď SR ako štát vznikla. Väčšina elít bola proti rozpadu ČSFR. Keďže mafiánska klika potrebovala samostatné Slovensko kvôli svojim zlodejským zámerom (s národom to malo pramálo spoločné), stavili na národnú kartu, pretože je to najjednoduchšie. Od vtedy sa téma vlastenectva spája s najväčším bahnom, ktoré na Slovensku máme – od Mečiara, cez Slotu, Rafaja, Malíkovú až po Markuša. S týmto sa intelektuálna elita nemôže identifikovať a teda má prirodzenú potrebu vymedziť sa proti tomu. Žiaľ, za 20 rokov sa nenašiel nikto z “demokratického” politického spektra, kto by bol schopný redefinovať vlastenectvo a prevziať národnú agendu. Prvý, kto to mimo hejslováckych mafiánskych štruktúr spravil je paradoxne komunista Fico a vychádza mu to (čo je úplne jasné, vlastnectvo je dobrá agenda) – o dôvod viac pre intelektuálov káľať na všetko, čo sa s tým spája. Mne je z tejto našej elity na blitie, včerajší Hríbov komentár, dnes Fila a x ďalších. Sami si tú tému nechali ukradnúť a teraz drístajú tak, že to snaď nie je ani možné. A ľudia, ktorí nemajú radi Rafaja sú prirodzene s nimi, bez toho, aby sa zamysleli nad obsahom.
+
http://kyberia.sk/id/5209176
Najlacnejším druhom hrdosti je však hrdosť národná; prezrádza totiž o tom, kto je ňou ovládaný, že trpí nedostatkom individuálnych vlastností, na ktoré by mohol byť hrdý – inak by nesiahal po niečom, čo má spoločné s toľkými miliónmi. Kto má významné osobné prednosti, bude skôr spoznávať chyby svojho vlastného národa, lebo ich má ustavične na očiach. No každý žalostný hlupák, ktorý nemá na svete nič, na čo by mohol byť hrdý, siaha po poslednom prostriedku, aby hrdý mohol byť, po národe, ku ktorému práve patrí; ním pookrieva a je vďačne pripravený hájiť všetky chyby a hlúposti svojho národa rukami aj nohami.
Národnému charakteru, keďže sa týka množstva, nikdy nebude možné úprimne priznať veľa dobrého. Ako národný charakter sa skôr nazýva odlišná forma, v akej sa v každej krajine javí ľudská ohraničenosť, zvrátenosť a špatnosť.
(Schopenhauer)

??
you are not an individual. Rather, you are a host of ‘dividuals’
(Deleuze 1 994: 258), effected by the social conjunction as an event.

In 1977, Michel Foucault suggested that political philosophy must
detach itself from the problem of sovereignty and the problems of law
and prohibition. ‘We need to cut off the King’s head’, as he famously put
it (Foucault 1980: 121).
Late in his life, Deleuze sensed the emergence of
a stratification that seemed to proceed from a radicalisation of this suggestion,
and which would eventually reconfigure the disciplinary societies
that Foucault analysed. Deleuze termed this new stratification ‘the
societies of control’ (Deleuze 1995 ) . In this formation, your identity is
not dependent on your narrative as a subject, whether of sovereignty or
of discipline, whether as citizen, consumer or family man. Rather, your
self is to be abstracted from databanks, registers, tests and focus group
interviews, and the data is to be personalised in the ‘security’ of passwords
that you memorise. You will be asked to carry out this abstraction
yourself. The ultimate test of ‘being human’ is not the question of
whether you are currently in or have ever been in prison, gone to school,
or been in the army. The ultimate test is: do you currently have a paid
job and which paid jobs have you had? The decisive technologies of our
age are the technologies of the labour market where a decoded flow of
labour joins up with a decoded flow of capital (Deleuze and Guattari
1984: 3 3 ) . Some of these technologies are no more complicated than a
folded piece of paper, a pamphlet.
(to sa mi nezda – preco prave ze ci mas job??)

(‘neutralny’ opis spolocnosti je falosny)
Zizek sees that the description
of the society that purported to be “neutral” would not
be objective, but would formally be “false” because it would
involve accepting the existing order. In a manner that is
reminiscent of Max Horkheimer’s 1937 essay “Traditional
and Critical Theory,” Zizek reads Lukács as maintaining
that a critical theory must recognize its own situatedness
and its own commitments to political action and social
transformation. Zizek wants to follow Lukács by showing
that historicism is not sufficiently historicist because it does
not give an account of itself as a social phenomenon and is
thus incomplete. Zizek maintains that social theory cannot
be objective in the sense of being politically “neutral,” and it
is incomplete unless it takes its own social embeddedness
into account. An important aspect of what the critical social
theory would have to explain is a question that traditional
theory ignores: Why does it meet with resistance? In this
respect for Zizek critical social theory is similar to psychoanalytic
theory, which also has to explain why its explanations
are often resisted at first by patients.
+
Saying that a
theory is partial is not the same as saying that it is false insofar
as partial representation is not the same as misrepresentation
or distortion.
(==> lukacs kritizoval ze ciastocna teoria je falosna, ze vtedy ide ‘len’ o jednu z perspektiv,
ktora zahrna len ciastocny obraz socialnej reality, ktora teda nie je objektivna, treba celostnu,
resp vedomie “imputed” to the class—-[to som nepochopil dobre];
kym zizek tvrdi ze angazovana ciastocna je ok kym som si vedomy ze je ciastocna lebo je pravdiva,
kedze ciastocna reprezentacia nie je to iste ako misrepresentation or distortion.
cize je ok teoretizovat localised case studies, napriklad na zaklade honest autobiografie).
+
critique of ideology:
Marx @ Capital: “They do not know it, but they are doing it.”
Zizek via Sloterdijk about it: Marx is interpreted wrongly and should go
“They know very well what they are doing, but still, they are doing it.”
~ instead of “we misrecognize what is really going on”, it suggests
“we misrecognize that nothing is really going on”.
This thought that things seem to be one
way but really are another way implies that there is a level
of reality that could be grasped correctly. Zizek manages to
disrupt this traditional epistemological understanding of
the distinction between appearance and reality.
& false: “reality is just an illusion”.
“ideology has nothing to do with ‘illusion'”.
“social reality” is an “ethical construction”.
+
the totality is encountered in its purest form when it fails, and when one
tries to distance oneself from it in order to maintain one’s
own purity.
+
“purity is the most perfidious form of ‘cheating.’ ”
+
(pochopit to v celku – to nejde – ale nechcem si to priznat –
nechcem vidiet ze si to neviem priznat)
Reality is usually thought of in terms of everything
that is the case, and it is also assumed that everything
coheres with everything else to form a totality, whether one
can grasp this totality or not. Generally it is granted that the
human mind cannot grasp the totality. If that is so, it can reasonably
be asked whether this notion of the totality is not
simply a product of the imagination. Zizek’s statement that
the totality, which is impossible, tries to cover up its own
impossibility, is admittedly paradoxical. How could something
that did not exist cover up its own nonexistence? The
answer depends on a psychoanalytic premise that
the fantasy desires to hide from itself its own inability to face up
to the nonexistence and the impossibility of its fantasized object.
+
(?) instead of thinking of reality as a given that is
antecedent to experience, one must try to think of reality as a
failed effect
+
If consciousness is nothing but the consciousness of
something other than it, and if that which is other-than-it is
nothing in itself, then it is not surprising that consciousness
is inscrutable.
“Consciousness, in effect, equals anxiety.”
+
the anxious awareness of mortality is not simply one
among many aspects of conscious awareness, but its “very
zero-level.” ~ [anthropocentric humanism]
+
“very model of self-awareness”: “ ‘I
know very well that I am mortal, but nevertheless. . . . (I do
not accept it; I unconsciously believe in my immortality,
since I cannot envisage my own death).’ ”
+
For Zizek poststructuralism is a misunderstanding
of French philosophy by North Americans:
“In short, an entity like ‘poststructuralist deconstructionism’
(the term itself is not used in France) comes into existence
only for a gaze that is unaware of the details of the
philosophical scene in France: this gaze brings together
authors (Derrida, Deleuze, Foucault, Lyotard, . . . ) who are
simply not perceived as part of the same épistème in
France.”68 On his view, to consider poststructuralism as a
form of critical theory is “a classification which is unthinkable
in France.”

[prolog]
00:43 < barak> tiez stale nechapem preco ma tak bavi suicide
00:44 < barak> asi ze som doteraz nic pocitovo podobne nepocul
00:55 < pht__> :) namotal si sa?
00:56 < barak> waga waga

SHAVIRO – POSTCINEMATIC AFFECT
(hudba a film hovoria o komplex social procesoch, ale nereprezuntuju ich az tak ako na nich aktivne participuju)
These works are symptomatic, in
that they provide indices of complex social processes, which they transduce,
condense and rearticulate in the form of what can be called, after Deleuze
and Guattari, ‘blocs of affect.’1 But they are also productive, in the sense
that they do not represent social processes, so much as they participate
actively in these processes, and help to constitute them.
(filmy a hudba generuju AFEKT ~ are machines for generating affect +
and for capitalising upon, or extracting value from, this affect.)
As such, they are not
ideological superstructures, as an older sort of Marxist criticism would have
it. Rather, they lie at the very heart of social production, circulation and
distribution.
(cize nie su marxisticky kritizovatelne? su proste nevyhnutne, neexistuje alternativa?)
They generate subjectivity and they play a crucial role in the
valorisation of capital.
+
1 Strictly speaking, Deleuze and Guattari say that the work of art ‘is a bloc of
sensations, that is to say, a compound of percepts and affects’ (1994, 164).

(afekt vs emotion via Massumi)
I follow Brian Massumi (2002, 23-45) in differentiating between affect and
emotion.
For Massumi, affect is primary, non-conscious, asubjective or
presubjective, asignifying, unqualified and intensive; while emotion is
derivative, conscious, qualified and meaningful, a ‘content’ that can be
attributed to an already-constituted subject.
[naozaj si hudbu pustam ako stimul pre vytvaranie pocitov,
vnimam ju v ramci multitaskingu, paralelne,
zaroven nad nom aj rozmyslam, cize okrem pasivneho prijimania afektov
syntetizujem pocity viazuce sa k nej ale aj k ostatnym veciam ktore robim]
[TYMITO POCITMI PRAVE HOVORIT O HUDBE –
je ale kazdy album vzdy dobry na uzky okruh pocitov?
alebo si dokazete pri rovnakej hudbe v roznom case syntetizovat rozne pocity?]
Emotion is affect captured by a
subject, or tamed and reduced to the extent that it becomes commensurate
with that subject. Subjects are overwhelmed and traversed by affect, but
they have or possess their own emotions.

re: Beller (stavia na nom, ale beller podcenuje rozdiel medzi cinematic a postcinematic,
co teda rozvija Shaviro)
However, I
think that he underestimates the differences between cinematic and post-cinematic
media: it is these differences that drive my own discussion here.

(subjekt = ekon.jednotka, ktora je sama pre seba kapitalom, producentom aj zdrojom prijmov=
“mal by som viac pracovat a zarobit lebo mam malo prachov”=zdroj prijmov
“potrebujem si spravit toto a tamto, v ramci vlastnej vyroby na vlastnu ‘zakazku'”=producent
“moj kapital su moje schopnosti, osobnost, profil”)
[uz par tyzdnov mam pocit ze sam seba exploitujem, ked chcem nieco dokoncit a podobne]
@neolib capitalism we see ourselves as subjects precisely to the extent that we are
autonomous economic units. As Foucault puts it, neoliberalism defines a new
mutation of ‘Homo oeconomicus as entrepreneur of himself, being for
himself his own capital, being for himself his own producer, being for himself
the source of [his] earnings’ (2008, 226).
(tomuto ale nerozumiem: )
For such a subject, emotions are
resources to invest, in the hope of gaining as large a return as possible. What
we know today as ‘affective labour’ is not really affective at all, as it
involves rather the sale of labour-power in the form of pre-defined and prepackaged
emotions.3
3 (nesuhlasi s Hardt+Negrim v tom ze):
For Hardt and Negri, ‘unlike emotions, which are mental phenomena, affects refer
equally to body and to mind. In fact, affects, such as joy and sadness, reveal the
present state of life in the entire organism’ (2004, 108)
(lebo):
(wrong) because there is no such thing as ‘mental phenomena’ that do not refer
equally to the body. The division between affect and emotion must rather be
sought elsewhere.
(preferuje massumiho definiciu pocitu)
emotion as the capture, and reduction-to-commensurability, of affect.
It is this reduction that,
among other things, allows for the sale and purchase of emotions as commodities.
(inak to je asi fakt pravda, tiez sa priklanam k massumovi)
(toto prirovnanie je divne):
In a certain sense, emotion is to affect as, in Marxist theory, labour-power is to
labour. For labour itself is an unqualifiable capacity, while labour-power is a
quantifiable commodity that is possessed, and that can be sold, by the worker.
(affective labour – @hardt+negri: sluzby produkujuce emocie, @shaviro: su tie sluzby
uz objektifikovane emocie):
Hardt and Negri’s own definition of affective labour in fact itself makes sense
precisely in the register of what I am calling labour-power and objectified emotions:
‘Affective labor, then, is labor that produces or manipulates affects such as a feeling
of ease, well-being, satisfaction, excitement, or passion. One can recognize affective
labor, for example, in the work of legal assistants, flight attendants, and fast food
workers (service with a smile)’ (108).

[tanecna hudba je velmi o emociach, idem do klubu a chcem sa zextatnit]

However, emotion as such is never closed or complete. It also still
testifies to the affect out of which it is formed, and that it has captured,
reduced and repressed. Behind every emotion, there is always a certain
surplus of affect that ‘escapes confinement’ and ‘remains unactualised,
inseparable from but unassimilable to any particular, functionally anchored
perspective’ (Massumi 2002, 35).
(teda ze pocit sa vzdy nadalej viaze k povodnemu afektu z ktoreho som ho
syntetizoval; pretoze tam stale ostava otvorene co z neho mozem dalsie
syntetizovat)
Privatised emotion can never entirely
separate itself from the affect from which it is derived. Emotion is
representable and representative; but it also points beyond itself to an affect
that works transpersonally and transversally, that is at once singular and
common (Hardt and Negri 2004, 128-129),
(tym ze je pocit zosobneny, tak sa vzdy viaze k afektu — ten je
transpersonalny a transversalny ——– ???? asi ze osobny a zaroven
spolocny–napriklad afekt produkujuci videom lady gaga)
and that is irreducible to any sort of representation.
Our existence is always bound up with affective and
aesthetic flows that elude cognitive definition or capture.
(ano, z afektov mozeme stale syntetizovat nove pocity,
ktore su este nesyntetizovane)4
4 (monoskop!!):
Fascism and Nazism in particular are
noteworthy for their mobilisation of cinematic affect; though arguably Soviet
communism and liberal capitalism also mobilized such affect in their own ways.

(@postmod nezmizol afekt ako tvrdi jameson, ale subjektivne pocity sa vytratili)
On the basis of his distinction between affect and emotion, Massumi
rejects Fredric Jameson’s famous claim about the ‘waning of affect’ in
postmodern culture (Jameson 1991, 10-12). For Massumi, it is precisely
subjective emotion that has waned, but not affect.

5 (anti-oedipus sa snazil spojit nekritizovatelnost afektu[massumi zastanca–ked kritizuje
jamesona napr..: ‘affect is not ownable or recognisable and is thus resistant to critique’]
a marxistickou teoriou, ktore su inak vacsinou stavane ostro proti sebe oboma tabormi):
Affect theory, or ‘non-representational theory’ (Thrift 2008), is usually placed in
sharp opposition to Marxist theory, by advocates of both approaches. I am
arguing, instead, that we need to draw them together. This is precisely what
Deleuze and Guattari attempted to do in Anti-Oedipus (1983). The attempt was
not entirely successful, but it seems prescient in the light of subsequent ‘neoliberal’
developments in both affective and political economies.
(via latour: sietove socialne procesy sa nedaju vysvetlit kategoriami ‘capital’ alebo
‘social’ lebo prave tie potrebujeme vysvetlit, co ale zaroven neznamena ze su
nepouzitelne, iba ze ich potrebujeme skonstruovat resp samokonstruovat znovu,
k comu upada latour v nepozornych momentoch)
I am largely sympathetic to Bruno Latour’s
insistence that networked social processes cannot be explained in terms of global
categories like ‘capital,’ or ‘the social’ – because these categories themselves are what
most urgently need to be explained.

Affect and
labour are two attributes of the same Spinozian substance; they are both
powers or potentials of the human body, expressions of its ‘vitality,’ ‘sense of
aliveness,’ and ‘changeability’ (Massumi 2002, 36).

(mapa:)
aesthetic of affective mapping.6 For Jameson and Deleuze and
Guattari alike, maps are not static representations, but tools for negotiating,
and intervening in, social space. A map does not just replicate the shape of a
territory; rather, it actively inflects and works over that territory.

[page 7]

…..(poznamky v printoute)
[7-24]

[25]

zaujimave, rozvit nejakym projektom:
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.

[5:00:47 PM] lucas kendo: :)
[5:32:23 PM] lucas kendo: preco lanierovi vadi anonymita
[5:32:25 PM] lucas kendo: ?
[5:32:44 PM] lucas kendo: “Don‟t post anonymously unless you really might be in danger.”
[5:32:57 PM] lucas kendo: prvy bod v suggestions ako zmenit status quo
[5:33:25 PM] dusanson: mozno dostava dirty maily od anonymov )
[5:33:35 PM] dusanson: neviem, cital som zatial len preface a reviews
[5:33:59 PM] dusanson: ale ten jeho plan je dost fail
[5:34:11 PM] dusanson: chce aby z kazdeho suboru bol len jeden kus
[5:34:17 PM] dusanson: teda aby sa veci nemuseli kopirovat
[5:34:52 PM] lucas kendo: hm no divne to znie cele.. najviacej mi vadi ze ini autori by si dali zalezat na tom zadefinovat pojmy ktore pouzivaju
[5:35:02 PM] lucas kendo: A similar campaign should be taking place now, influencing engineers, designers,
businesspeople, and everyone else to support humanistic alternatives whenever possible.
[5:35:06 PM] dusanson: jj, za to ho zdrbali vsetci
[5:35:08 PM] dusanson: ze pise esejisticky moc
[5:35:14 PM] lucas kendo: co je to humanistic v tejto vete ?????
[5:35:21 PM] lucas kendo: chapes,, ale on to tam vsade ma
[5:35:39 PM] dusanson: akoze sa vydal do boja proti web2 pliage
[5:35:47 PM] dusanson: ktora z nas robi zombikov alebo co
[5:36:21 PM] dusanson: ked ho zavolali na sxsw zrobit prednasku tak vsetkym povedal ze nech prestanu tweetovat a bavia sa f2f
[5:36:22 PM] dusanson: lol
[5:36:45 PM] lucas kendo: :))
[5:36:58 PM] dusanson: ako keby to neslo naraz
[5:36:59 PM] lucas kendo: preface bol super, ale dalsi text ma coraz viacej odradza
[5:37:14 PM] dusanson: jj, ten preface je asi jediny fajn na tej knihe
[5:37:15 PM] dusanson: :)
[5:38:55 PM] dusanson: kniha je najskor urcena pre starsich dobre situovanych panov, ktorym chybaju konzervativne argumenty proti web2 pliage co opantala mladez
[5:39:08 PM] lucas kendo: no ..
[5:39:37 PM] lucas kendo: no nic pise ze tie veci rozoberie v celej knizke tak snad najdem nejake argumenty ktorymi sa da naozaj nesuhlasit :)
[5:39:44 PM] dusanson: Lanier’s critique of online life has a strong whiff of the “false consciousness” dicta that gained currency in the aftermath of the New Left.
[5:39:55 PM] dusanson: par imo najdes
[5:40:06 PM] dusanson: pod bol z nej celkom uneseny
[5:40:55 PM] dusanson: si tam chcem pozriet co pise proti open sourcu
[5:41:35 PM] lucas kendo: tej vete nerozumiem
[5:41:38 PM] lucas kendo: co je to whiff ?
[5:41:42 PM] dusanson: He dismisses most modern culture as “retro” and “a petty mashup of preweb culture..It’s as if culture froze just before it became digitally open, and all we can do now is mine the past like salvagers picking over a garbage dump.
[5:41:45 PM] lucas kendo: co je to false consciousness ?
[5:42:12 PM] lucas kendo: a f.c. je reakcia na new left, alebo je to vlastnost pripisovana new left ?
[5:42:18 PM] lucas kendo: ah som blby :)
[5:42:56 PM] dusanson: no ze ked novej lavici dosiel dych tak sa vratila spat k boju dobra so zlom, kde za zle sa povazuju rozne ezotericke veci ako trh alebo kapitalizmus s nejakym privlastkom, a ze lanier sa uchyluje k podobnemu polarizovaniu
[5:43:39 PM] dusanson: ze osocuje tych ‘zlych’ a stoji na strane dobrych
[5:43:57 PM] dusanson: resp ze clovek ma skazene vedomie a potrebuje sa od niecoho ocistit
[5:44:59 PM] dusanson: k “false consciousness” sa uchylila ‘porazena’ new left
[5:45:52 PM] dusanson: Online culture “is a culture of reaction without action”
[5:46:05 PM] lucas kendo: jj to tam je
[5:46:23 PM] lucas kendo: v niecom kusok pravda ked sa zameras len nato ako je teraz popularne robit s klise
[5:46:30 PM] lucas kendo: ako zo zakladnymi blokmi nejakeho diela
[5:46:33 PM] lucas kendo: a metanaracia a tak
[5:46:43 PM] dusanson: klise tu bolo vzdy )
[5:47:30 PM] lucas kendo: inac ten gegen die wand je super
[5:47:48 PM] lucas kendo: sa mi pacilo jake tam silne veci setcia prezivali bez toho aby ten film sam o sebe bol pateticky
[5:47:57 PM] lucas kendo: teraz mame rozkukane to co natocil v 2007
[5:48:02 PM] dusanson: lanierov refren je volanie po ‘novom digitalnom humanistickom cloveku’, ktoreho nestrhne hlas masy …
new collectivist ethos — embodied by everything from Wikipedia to “American Idol” to Google searches — diminishes the importance and uniqueness of the individual voice, and that the “hive mind” can easily lead to mob rule
[5:48:05 PM] lucas kendo: soul kitchen su len ruske abo spanish ripy
[5:48:18 PM] dusanson: gegendiewand som videl snad v svetozore, sa mi pacil tiez
[5:48:26 PM] dusanson: som nasiel taliansky dvdrip
[5:48:39 PM] lucas kendo: no pokial to je bez titles tak nic moc
[5:48:45 PM] lucas kendo: akoze ja nemcinu davam
[5:48:47 PM] dusanson: uvidme
[5:48:57 PM] lucas kendo: a italian asi znamena dabovane nie ?
[5:49:04 PM] dusanson: dufam ze nieee
[5:50:46 PM] dusanson: Lanier argues for a third way, inspired by the Internet’s first visionary, Ted Nelson. Nelson created a proto-Web in 1960 called Xanadu that simplified the user’s experience. One password and fee to enter the world, and one logical copy of each file, instead of the endless file sharing that clogs our bandwidth and cheapens the discourse.
[5:51:04 PM] dusanson: to ale neni ani utopia, skor retroutopia
[5:51:16 PM] lucas kendo: no tak retroutopia je aj militant modernism
[5:51:20 PM] lucas kendo: a to je fasa
[5:51:54 PM] dusanson: hm, akurat keby prisiel s nejakou novou, nelsona poznam :(
[5:52:42 PM] lucas kendo: inac on tam mrte operuje singularitou ale pritom mne je cely ten new age hogwah dost vzdialeny ale aj tak som zastanca “openness” a citam boingboing
[5:53:21 PM] dusanson: neviem preco si mysli ze edge.org maju nejaky vpyv
[5:53:22 PM] dusanson: l
[5:54:19 PM] dusanson: aj ked osobnych hodnotovych rebrickoch zapalenych technoevangelistov v silicon valley asi maju..
[5:59:36 PM] lucas kendo: aaa
[5:59:38 PM] lucas kendo: uz som tam
[5:59:49 PM] lucas kendo: I say that information doesn‟t deserve to be free.
[6:03:13 PM] lucas kendo: aha
[6:03:21 PM] lucas kendo: tak on berie informaciu ako ulozenu experience
[6:03:27 PM] lucas kendo: nieco ako petencialna energia tehly
[6:03:32 PM] lucas kendo: ktoru nikto zdvihne a polozi na skrinu
[6:03:39 PM] lucas kendo: az ked ju posunies aby spadla tak sa ta energia uvolni
[6:03:50 PM] lucas kendo: takisto infoska musi byt prezita aby bola pouzitelna
[6:03:51 PM] lucas kendo: Information of the kind that purportedly wants to be free is nothing but a shadow of our
own minds, and wants nothing on its own. It will not suffer if it doesn‟t get what it wants
[6:04:10 PM] lucas kendo: a zevraj sucasny technokrati chcu aby informacia zila
[6:04:14 PM] lucas kendo: a presiel na turinga
[6:04:18 PM] lucas kendo: huh ?
[6:05:27 PM] lucas kendo: no nie
[6:05:49 PM] lucas kendo: a to ze infosky mozu byt zive je vraj sposobene tym ze ako turing trpel pred smrtou lebo musel brat zenske hormony aby sa vyliecil z homosexuality
[6:06:07 PM] lucas kendo: a vymyslel turingov test kde je pocitac posudzovany nezavisle na jeho fyzicne
[6:06:13 PM] lucas kendo: alebo teda druha strana – len na reakciach
[6:06:35 PM] lucas kendo: a ze toto bolo skrz jeho tuzbu aby aj on ako weirdo gaysky nebol posudzovany ako gay ale ako nejaka bytost
[6:06:46 PM] lucas kendo: no a turingov test potom ovplyvnil dalsie generacie a dal vzniknut tejto myslienke
[6:06:49 PM] lucas kendo: omg
[6:07:41 PM] lucas kendo: What the test really tells us, however, even if it‟s not necessarily what Turing hoped it
would say, is that machine intelligence can only be known in a relative sense, in the eyes of a
human beholder
[6:08:22 PM] lucas kendo: to je akoze pravda, ale tam skor ide o funkciu… ze je jedno aky je substrat, ak ho nevies odlisit od toho co pokladas za inteligentne
[6:08:58 PM | Edited 6:09:04 PM] lucas kendo: som zvedavy kedy vytiahne a misquotne searla
[6:12:19 PM] dusanson: protiargument je ze vyvoj prvych pocitacov znacne katalyzoval hon po fungujucej anti-aircraft masinke na zostrelovanie lietadiel, z coho vznikla teoria negativneho feedbacku, z ktorej vzisla kybernetika… tam slo o realny fyzicky svet, ziadne myslienkove virtualitky odtrhnute od hmoty..
[6:13:21 PM] lucas kendo: protiargument ku protiargumentu je ze
[6:13:25 PM] lucas kendo: (budem citovat)
[6:13:26 PM] dusanson: na tom pracovali nezavisle na sebe matematici v usa, ceskoslovensku, madarsku a rusku, o ktorych zatial viem
[6:13:42 PM] dusanson: z ktorych sa neskor stali kyberneticki pioneri
[6:13:47 PM] lucas kendo: Computers and chess share a common ancestry. Both originated as tools of war. Chess
began as a battle simulation, a mental martial art. The design of chess reverberates even further
into the past than that—all the way back to our sad animal ancestry of pecking orders and
competing clans.
Likewise, modern computers were developed to guide missiles and break secret military
codes. Chess and computers are both direct descendants of the violence that drives evolution in
the natural world, however sanitized and abstracted they may be in the context of civilization.
The drive to compete is palpable in both computer science and chess, and when they are brought
together, adrenaline flows.
[6:14:45 PM] dusanson: ku guide missiles a break codes pridavam este odstranovanie noisu z telefonov
[6:14:53 PM] dusanson: to su tri hlavne spustace ktore sa uvadzaju casto
[6:15:04 PM] dusanson: telefonneho signalu teda
[6:16:15 PM] dusanson: ano, je to strasne, pocitace nam dala vojna
[6:16:37 PM] dusanson: ako s tym suvisi ta turingova homosexualita?
[6:17:02 PM] dusanson: btw vojna nam dala aj UN resolution o ludskych pravach
[6:18:00 PM] lucas kendo: ^^ toto posledne je fajn
[6:18:13 PM] lucas kendo: no jeho homosexualita suvisi s tym tak ako som napisal
[6:18:34 PM] lucas kendo: ze on tuzil podla laniera aby sa ku inteligencii pristupovalo odfyzicnene ako ku nejakej cistej informacii
[6:18:40 PM] lucas kendo: bez konotacii ze je povedzme homosexualna
[6:18:49 PM] dusanson: inak vyvoj toho z coho mohli byt pocitace zastavila vojna napr v priprade Zuseho, Lebedeva a Atanasova
[6:18:50 PM] lucas kendo: a ze to bolo tym ze tak trpel a potom sa zabil kvoli tomu
[6:19:23 PM] dusanson: pracovali na protopocitacoch este v 30tych rokoch
[6:19:41 PM] lucas kendo: no a babbage dali dole okolnosti
[6:19:46 PM] lucas kendo: ten mohol by najskorsi
[6:19:58 PM] lucas kendo: s analytical engine
[6:20:03 PM] dusanson: tam je vtipna story
[6:20:11 PM] dusanson: s tym ze za nim prisla ada
[6:20:38 PM] dusanson: ktora chodila casto stavkovat na dostihy, ze vyratajme si sance a podajme to tak aby sme vyhrali
[6:20:53 PM] dusanson: mu pisala aj prednasky
[6:21:02 PM] dusanson: babbage ju zatienil, lebo bol o 1-2 generacie starsi
[6:21:18 PM] dusanson: pritom vela veci ma na svedomi ona :)
[6:22:18 PM] lucas kendo: hmm
[6:22:48 PM] lucas kendo: podla mna z tohto a leibnizovej storky pochadza cela ta fascinacia viktorianskou proto-tech dobou v steam-punkovej estetike
[6:23:01 PM] lucas kendo: ze co keby to akoze vyslo vtedy
[6:23:20 PM] lucas kendo: leibniz si tiez postaval masinu na ratanie integralov myslim
[6:24:18 PM] lucas kendo: aha nie .. len – + * /
[6:26:06 PM] lucas kendo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepped_Reckoner
[6:26:17 PM] dusanson: developed a ‘no-fail’ winning system for horse racing. Unfortunately, horses not being big on math, the system did fail, and Ada finished her life as a bankrupt laudanum addict, dying of cancer at the age of 36.
[6:26:47 PM] dusanson: Augusta Ada Byron was a complex, eccentric character, and it’s probable that none of her contemporaries ever really understood the woman who managed to combine an amazing intelligence with a supposed alcohol dependency and a drug-induced fixation on fairies.
[6:26:48 PM] dusanson: :)
[6:27:45 PM] lucas kendo: whoa no musela byt dost excentricka
[6:27:49 PM] lucas kendo: asi ako vdm
[6:27:50 PM] lucas kendo: a viac
[6:27:54 PM] dusanson: jj
[6:28:13 PM] dusanson: hura nasiel som ten clanok http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/19/hunt.php
[6:28:15 PM] dusanson: si ho daj niekedy
[6:30:26 PM] dusanson: ajo tak tie dostihy nebola obsesia ale len sposob ako sa dostat k prachom

+

17:24 < gnd> ten druhy tribe co menuje lanier okrem weizenbauma co som cital
vobec nepoznam
17:24 < gnd>
the late Joseph
17:24 < gnd> Weizenbaum, Ted Nelson, Terry Winograd, Alan Kay, Bill Buxton,
Doug Englebart, Brian
17:24 < gnd> Cantwell Smith, Henry Fuchs, Ken Perlin, Ben Schneiderman (who
invented the idea of clicking
17:24 < gnd> on a link), and Andy Van Dam
17:26 < wao> http://www.mylocaltribune.net/
17:27 < gnd> nah ale namiesto 100 stran preco tito ludia (cybernetic totalists)
tvoria jednu skupinu a na com operuju odbije troma odstavcami …
17:27 < gnd> snad sa k tomu este dostane dalej v knizke
+
17:55 < gnd> he antihuman approach to computation is one of the most
baseless ideas in human
17:55 < gnd> history. A computer isn”t even there unless a person experiences
it. There will be a warm mass of
17:55 < gnd> patterned silicon with electricity coursing through it, but the
bits don”t mean anything without a
17:55 < gnd> cultured person to interpret them.
17:55 < gnd> This is not solipsism. You can believe that your mind
makes up the world, but a bullet
17:55 < gnd> will still kill you. A virtual bullet, however, doesn”t even exist
unless there is a person to
17:55 < gnd> recognize it as a representation of a bullet. Guns are real in a
way that computers are not.
17:55 < gnd> wtf ?

+

pod,

with reviews i prefer linking the small sites,
since the big ones usually cannot afford being honest
(the one in NYT mentions some catchy ideas, which is ok).
xlt review would get a link for sure! )
errr i should be linking reviews to more books,
but it’s just take too much time, wish there would
be some kind of a book review aggregator (which i’m sure
it is), any ideas? :)

btw
http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2010-03-18-lovink-en.html
lovink in this article mentions lanier, carr and schirrmacher,
although many times he tends to come up with too generalising
statements, which makes him feel prophetic, but they don’t even
have the poetic utopic potential, are just theoretical show-offs
which doesnt challenge anything, like eg. “It is no longer
necessary to approach the PC with a question and then dive
into the archive” etc.. same goes with lanier btw.
anyway, you can still find good insights (as with lanier too)

yea, if you think about what is lanier saying in the nutshell,
it doesn’t really makes sense.. ..or maybe i should better take him
seriously and stop using the cellphone since the network
is being ran by capitalist oligarchs, and sending short messages
and disembodily talking to people fucks up my true personality :)

btw i really like the preface of the book!

re monoskop linking
thx for asking, we like to be linked from the friendly sites!

ciao, d.

> i will for sure utilize for grabbing quotes…
>
> still not finished, and encountered lots of things i’m not sure i agree w/ …
> but very profound stuff all along the way…
>
> tech liberation is a compelling review w/ useful links so glad u posted,
> NYT is also quite good

IT sector takes over the media industry, the cult of “free” and “open” is nothing but ironic revenge on the e-commerce madness.
During the post-9/11 reconstruction period, Silicon Valley found renewed inspiration in two projects: the vital energy of the search start-up Google (which successfully managed to postpone its IPO for years), and the rapidly emerging blog scene
Whereas blogging embodied the non-profit, empowering aspect of personal responses grouped around a link, Google developed techniques that enabled it to parasite on other people’s content, a.k.a. “organizing the world’s information”
Profit is no longer made at the level of production, but through the control of distribution channels. Apple, Amazon, eBay and Google are the biggest winners in this game
Whereas Keen could still be read as a grumpy and jealous response of the old media class, this is no longer the case with Nicholas Carr’s The Big Switch (2008),[2] in which he analyses the rise of cloud computing
The last chapter, entitled “iGod”, indicates a “neurological turn” in net criticism. Starting from the observation that Google’s intention has always been to turn its operation into an Artificial Intelligence, “an artificial brain that is smarter than your brain” (Sergey Brin), Carr turns his attention to future of human cognition: “The medium is not only the message. The medium is the mind. It shapes what we see and how we see it.” With the Internet stressing speed, we become the Web’s neurons: “The more links we click, pages we view, and transactions we make, the more intelligence the Web makes, the more economic value it gains, and the more profit it throws off.”
In his famous 2008 Atlantic Monthly essay “Does Google make us stupid? What does the Internet do to our brains?” Carr takes this argument a few steps further and argues that constant switching between windows and sites and frantic use of search engines will ultimately dumb us down.
Internet-savvy users, she states, seem to lose the ability to read and enjoy thick novels and comprehensive monographs.
Carr and others cleverly exploit the Anglo-American obsession with anything related to the mind, brain and consciousness – mainstream science reporting cannot get enough of it. A thorough economic (let alone Marxist) analysis of Google and the free and open complex is seriously uncool.
The Internet and society debate should be about the politics and aesthetics of its network architecture and not be “medicalized”. So instead of repeating what the brain faction proclaims, I would like to turn to trends that need equal attention
There is a fundamental shift away from the static archive towards the “flow” and the “river”.
History is something to get rid of. Silicon Valley is gearing up for the colonization of real-time, away from the static web “page” that still refers to the newspaper. Users no longer feel the need to store information and the “cloud” facilitates this liberating movement.
Some have even said goodbye to the very idea of “search” because it is too time-consuming an activity often with unsatisfactory outcomes.
Despite all the justified calls for “slow communication”, the market is moving in the opposite direction. Soon, people may not have time to pour some file from a dusty database.
Much like in finance, the media industry is exploring possibilities to maximize surplus value from the exploitation of milliseconds.
There is no evidence that the world is becoming more virtual. We are no longer encouraged to act out some role, but forced to be “ourselves” (which is no less theatrical or artificial).
Trust is the oil of global capitalism and the security state, required by both sides in any transaction or exchange
The old idea that the virtual is there to liberate you from your old self has collapsed. It is all about self-management and techno-sculpturing: how do you shape the self in real-time flow?
The self that is presented here is post-cosmetic. The ideal is to become neither the Other nor the better human. The polished perfect personality lacks empathy and is straight-out suspect.
Our profiles remain cold and unfinished if we do not expose at least some aspects of our private lives. Otherwise we are considered robots, anonymous members of a vanishing twentieth century mass culture.
In Cold Intimacies, Eva Illouz puts it this way: “It is virtually impossible to distinguish the rationalization and commodification of selfhood from the capacity of the self to shape and help itself and to engage in deliberation and communication with others.”
At first glance, the idea of the netizen is a mid-1990s response to the first wave of users that took over the Net. The netizen moderates, cools down heated debates, and above all responds in a friendly, non-repressive manner. The netizen does not represent the Law, is no authority, and acts like a personal advisor, a guide in a new universe. The netizen is thought to act in the spirit of good conduct and corporate citizenship. Users were to take social responsibility themselves – it was not a call for government regulation and was explicitly designed to keep legislators out of the Net.
Bots play a increasing role in the automated policing of large websites.
“personal information autonomy”, as David d’Heilly once put it
The rise of the national web
42.6 per cent of Internet users are located in Asia
Only around 25 per cent of content is in English these days.
China is now exporting its national firewall technology to Sri Lanka, which intends to use it to block the “offensive websites” of exile Tamil Tiger groups
“Democratization” means that firms and politicians have a goal and then invite others to contribute to it.
young people are reluctant to use Twitter – it just isn’t their thing.
social networking sites did not originate in a social movement setting. They were developed as post-dotcom responses to the e-commerce wave of the late 1990s, which had no concept of what users were looking for online
Instead of being regarded merely as consumers of goods and services, Web 2.0 users are pressed to produce as much data as possible. Profiles are abstracted from so-called “user generated content” that are then sold to advertisers as direct marketing data.
In China, dissidents with their own proxy servers that help to circumvent the Wall remain marginal as long as they cannot transport their “memes” into other social contexts.
11:11 < barak> Carr and others cleverly exploit the Anglo-American obsession
with anything related to the mind, brain and consciousness .
mainstream science reporting cannot get enough of it. A thorough
economic (let alone Marxist) analysis of Google and the free and
open complex is seriously uncool.
11:12 < barak> Nicholas Carr’s The Big Switch (2008), in which he analyses the
rise of cloud computing
11:12 < barak> The last chapter, entitled “iGod”, indicates a “neurological
turn” in net criticism
11:13 < barak> coskoro na logu
11:18 < barak> carr napisal pred dvoma rokmi ten google makes us stupid clanok
11:19 < barak> ze freneticke prepinanie medzi oknami v prehliadaci etc nas
oblbuje
11:20 < barak> Whereas Carr’s take on the collapse of the white male’s
multi-tasking capacities had the couleur locale of a US
IT-business expert a.k.a. East Coast intellectual, Schirrmacher
moves the debate into the continental European context of an
aging middle class driven by defensive anxiety over Islamic
fundamentalism and Asian hypermodernity.
11:21 < barak> Like Carr, Schirrmacher seeks evidence of a deteriorating human
brain that can no longer keep up with iPhones, Twitter and
Facebook on top of the already existing information flows from
television, radio and the printed press.
11:21 < barak> potom schirrmachra sprdli ze je konzervativec a navyse novinar v
sebeobrane voci internetu
11:22 < ach> typicka sokratovska kritika noveho media.
11:22 < barak> jj
11:22 < barak> lanier detto
11:23 < barak> Lanier asks why the past two decades have not resulted in new
music styles and subcultures, and blames the strong emphasis on
retro in contemporary, remix-dominated music culture.
11:23 < barak> ?!?!
11:23 < ach> ]]: aha, uz to stihli dat dole :)
11:23 < barak> akoby hudba nebola vzdy retro
11:24 < barak> The democratization of digital tools has not led to the
emergence of “super-Gershwins”. Instead, Lanier sees “pattern
exhaustion”, a phenomena in which a culture runs out of
variations on traditional designs and becomes less creative:
11:26 < ach> “When asked why in the past 20 years, on paper, new types of music
and culture is characterized by the reasons for Yee, but the
defendant quickly and again, mixed culture.”
11:29 < ach> pre triforce gang
http://i461.photobucket.com/albums/qq340/pigcore/061.jpg
11:33 < ach> “The night smelled like Roisin Murphy, and a child has been born.
And it wasn’t a regular child, it was a girl with very small head.”
11:33 < ach> …25 translations later we get:
11:33 < ach> “Murphy Dermde overnight. So this is no ordinary boy with his head
woman.”
11:35 < barak> Some have even said goodbye to the very idea of “search” because
it is too time-consuming an activity often with unsatisfactory
outcomes.
11:36 < barak> There is a fundamental shift away from the static archive
towards the “flow” and the “river”
11:36 < barak> History is something to get rid of. Silicon Valley is gearing up
for the colonization of real-time, away from the static
11:36 < barak> web “page” that still refers to the newspaper. Users no longer
feel the need to store information and the “cloud”
11:36 < barak> facilitates this liberating movement.
11:36 < barak> oda na cloud computing
11:37 < barak> This could, potentially, be the point at which the Google empire
starts to crumble
11:37 < barak> ^ tak
11:38 < barak> Despite all the justified calls for “slow communication”, the
market is moving in the opposite direction. Soon, people may not
have time to pour some file from a dusty database
11:40 < barak> It is no longer necessary to approach the PC with a question and
then dive into the archive. The Internet as a whole is going
real time in an attempt to come closer to the messiness, the
complexities of the real-existing social world.
11:40 < ach> utopicke/zovseobecnujuce.
11:40 < barak> jj, lovink at his best :)
11:40 < barak> look at Twitter, which resembles ascii email and SMS messages on
your 2001 cell phone
11:41 < ach> moj twitter urcite nepripomina ani jedno
11:41 < barak> to sa tykalo dizajnu
11:43 < ach> ved ma uplne ine farby ako moj telefon.
11:49 < barak> The self that is presented here is post-cosmetic. The ideal is
to become neither the Other nor the better human. The
11:49 < barak> polished perfect personality lacks empathy and is straight-out
suspect.
11:49 < barak> Our profiles remain cold and unfinished if we do not expose at
least some aspects of our private lives. Otherwise we are
11:49 < barak> considered robots, anonymous members of a vanishing twentieth
century mass culture.

shoegaze (late 80s)
by NME & Melody Maker: musicians stand relatively still during live performances, in a detached, introspective, non-confrontational state, hence the idea that they were gazing at their shoes.

toytronica
ti s mackami, Four Tet (London, M, *77)
Four Tet/Pause/Domino (01)
Four Tet/Pause/Rounds (03)

kapely okolo not fun festu

—

via http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-12-22/music/the-decade-in-music-genre-hype

underground hip-hop (1998-2003)
The Definitive Jux roster, Atmosphere, Blackalicious, Cannibal Ox

glitch (2000-2002)
Also, Tortoise and Björk said it makes you smart and cool and handsome
Kid606, Prefuse 73, Kit Clayton
VA/The Clicks & Cuts 2 (01)

return of the rock (2001-2002)
boring rock
The White Stripes, The Strokes, the Hives, the Vines

electroclash (2001-2003)
Somehow finding the common ground between Fashion Week and college radio, electroclash artists used tinny keyboard blips and hackneyed new wave clichés to help publicize their oversize personalities (and occasionally their music).
Electroclash never really died—it just keeps renaming itself every three years. See the “electropunk” of MU, the “electropop” of the Knife, or the “wonky pop” of La Roux.
Peaches, Miss Kittin & the Hacker, Felix Da Housecat

mash-ups (2001-2004)
Danger Mouse, 2 Many DJs, Freelance Hellraiser ~ 02 @NYT

dance-punk (2002-2005)
early 80s post-punk + early 00s post-punk
The Rapture, Radio 4, !!!

grime (2003-2006)
London garage+hiphop+dancehall
Dizzee Rascal, Wiley, Kano ~ 03 @Guardian
Dizzee Rascal/Boy in Da Corner (03)

freak-folk/new weird america (2004-2006)
Joanna Newsom (CA, *82 cp ahau), Devendra Banhart (Houston/TX, *81 ge 10 manik+), CocoRosie (Paris, FF)
CocoRosie/La maison de mon reve/Touch and Go (04)
Devendra Banhart/Oh Me Oh My/Young God (02)
Devendra Banhart/Rejoicing in the Hands/Young God (04)
Devendra Banhart/Nino Rojo/Young God (04)
Joanna Newsom/The Milk-Eyed Mender (04)
CocoRosie/Noah’s Ark (05)
Devendra Banhart/Cripple Crow/XL (05)
Joanna Newsom, Ys/Drag City (06)
CocoRosie/The Adventures of Ghosthorse and Stillborn/Touch and Go (07)
Devendra Banhart/Smokey Rolls Down Thunder Canyon/XL (07)
Devendra Banhart/What Will We Be/Reprise (09)
Joanna Newsom, Have One On Me/Drag City (10): Mega-sized Laurie Anderson ambition used to tackle not America, but love and foxes and fish.#6

hipster metal (2004-2007)
Boris (Tokyo, MMF, funguju od 92, striedaju zanre furt), Wolfmother (Sydney, MMM, fung od 00), Dead Meadow (DC, MMMM, fung od 98), Mastodon (Atlanta/Georgia, MMMM, fung od 99) ~ 06 @NYT
Mastodon/Leviathan (04)
Boris/Pink (05)

hyphy (2005-2006)
bay area rap
E-40, Keak Da Sneak, Mistah F.A.B.

blog house (2006-2008)
french nu-electro
Justice, Simian Mobile Disco, Boys Noize

lo-fi/shitgaze/diy noise-punk (2007-2008)
by De Broux of Psychedelic Horseshit told his music was not like the shoegaze that Whitehurst listened to, but rather, it was “shitgaze”.
The same crappily recorded garage-punk tantrums that have been around since the days of Count Five—but now on trendy indie-rock record labels you’ve heard of!
Times New Viking (Columbus/Ohio, MMF, art school studs), No Age (LA, MM, *81 pi 3 muluc & sa 12 chuen*), Jay Reatard (Memphis, M, 80 ta 6 ben-10 cocaine+alcohol, top 10/08, aggr-garage-punk+melodic pop, vela kapiel mal)
Times New Viking/Dig Yourself/Siltbreeze (05)
Times New Viking/Present the Paisley Reich/Siltbreeze (06)
No Age/Weird Rippers/Fat Cat (07)
No Age/Nouns/Sub Pop (5/08) [PF 9.2]
Times New Viking/Rip It Off/Matador (08)
Jay Reatard/Watch Me Fall/Matador (8/09): You can’t go home again, pinhead.#7
No Age/Losing Feeling EP/Sub Pop (9/09): Funkless goons gracefully enter their “Chairs Missing” period.#7
Times New Viking/Born Again Revisited/Matador (9/09): Still learning Vaselines melodies, how to make lo-fi to soothe instead of grate.#6.5

glo-fi/chillwave (2009)
chillwave by blogger Carles (Hipster Runoff)
mushy textures, summery melodies, tape distortion ~ Toro Y Moi (SC, M), Memory Tapes (NJ, M), Neon Indian (Austin/NYC, M+FMM, *89, pitchfork: best new music), Washed Out (SC, M) ~ jj, Pocahaunted, Ducktails ~ 03/10 @WSJ
Memory Tapes/Seek Magic/Sth in Construction (8/09): Chill project wave fi drugs gaze pseudonym summer dream dance art blog hazy 2009 nostalgia bedroom.#4.5
Washed Out/Life Of Leisure/Mexican Summer (9/09): Tears For Fears via Ariel Pink hiss-wave, a too-cold entry into the Nite Jewel sweepstakes.#5
Neon Indian/Psychic Chasms/Lefse (10/09): Hazy gloopcore gets brighter moths, superer rainbows.#6
Toro Y Moi/Causers Of This/Carpark (02/10): Prefuse blues makes them smarter, funkier than drab chillwave peers. But better? #5.5

—

ine:
Owen Hatherley’s term ‘pseudomodernism’
used to describe the seemingly modernist geometries of the recent ‘building as sign’ architectural style nurtured by Norman Foster
http://themeasurestaken.blogspot.com/2008/11/icons-in-fire.html

????!!
Oneida, Swod, Animal Collective, Dan Deacon, Dakota Suite, Peter Broderick (4 Track Songs), Yeasayer, Murcof, Beirut, Daedelus, William
Basinski, hamburg kapela z newnew?, Paul DeMarinis, Andrew WK, Andrew Liles, Bibio (Fi), RiSIL (Non Meters Vol 1),
Cloaks, Terrible Eagle, The XX (XX, 09), Radiohead, Wavves, Astral Social Club, Grouper
Gil-Scott Heron (I’m New Here 10), Bill Callahan, Bon Iver, Cindytalk, Evangelista, Fursaxa,
Felicia Atkinson & Sylvain Chauveau [Roman Anglais], irr. app. (ext.) – kreiselwelle, Karl Blau, judith juillerat-soliloquy, Klimek,
Mi Ami (cosmic disco-punk hedonism), MV & EE, Jon Hopkins
Zola Jesus (Madison/WI, Nika Danilova, F, *89 ar 8 etznab+) crimsonwave & lo-fi goth
Fennesz, Jan Jelinek, Alva Noto
Apparat, Ellen Allien
Vindicatrix/Die Alte Boesen Lieder/Mordant Music (10) (David Aird, London, part of SE EN’s Mentalist Assoc, M)
my tags: dada, german, spaceship, schubert, classical, decay, dubstep, mad scientist, 21st century song
Fisher@Wire: dadaist Big Pop; Schubert’s Winterreise being sung on a decaying space station;
consistency generated from decaying fragments of dubstep, classical music, unhinged crooning and noise;
gibbers like some mad inventor talking to himself
Ben Frost/By The Throat/Bedroom Community (09) (IS, M)
my tags: noise, cinematic, minimalism
positioned between momentous expressionist soundtrack composition – with a strong undertow of Noise and epic minimalism (Wire)
Harappian Night Recordings (Syed Kamran Ali, Sheffield/UK, M)
my tags: impro, shamanic, arabic, sufi, far east, jam, loose, psych
Spicer@Wire: young British man of Asian descent, making musical forgeries from an imagined East, recalling the work of American outsiders,
and released by a label at the heart of the Arabic world
Cluster/Qua/Klangbad-Broken Silence (09) (HJ Roedelius+Dieter Moebius, *34, MM)
King Midas Sound/Waiting For You/Hyperdub (Kevin Martin+Roger Robinson+Hitomi, MMF, Martin: ex-The Bug)
my tags: spectral dub, dub
Barker@Wire: reminiscent of Tricky’s Maxinquaye; themes of fear, isolation and love on the verge of loss; vocals: Roger Robinson;
sounds w/ dulled down drums, mogadon beats, weathered FX and mournful synth counterpoint;
gave dancehall an unexpected reversal, slowing it down until it took on an emotional register of eternal loss
Kuupuu/Lumen Tahden/Time-Lag (Jonna Karanka, FI, F)
Robot Koch/Death Star Droid/Robots Don’t Sleep
my tags: mash-up, soul, r&b, world music, hiphop, psych rock, dubstep
Monolake/Silence/Imbalance Computer Music (09) (Robert Henke, M)
my tags: post-techno, post-dubstep, berghain
Autechre/Oversteps
my tags: dance music
Sharp@Wire: “ilanders” revolves around a languid, cyclical bassline that is subjected to the most exquisite abrasions as surges of
phosphorescent noise obscure and qualify every melodic cadence
Gary War/Horrible Parades (heavy on synths, effects, and lo-fi noise)
Richardson@Wire: “pop for experimental music fans”
Mordan Music/Symptoms/Ghost Box (10/09) (Baron Mordant)
Boomkat: blending FX swamped synthlines and dancefloor-suspicious rhythms with his own vocals
Mordant Music/Dead Air (06)
Mugwump@Quietus: vicious car crash between Saint Etienne and Throbbing Gristle with Sarah Cracknell regenerating into the warm form of Phillip Elsmore.

freak-folk/new weird america (2004-2006)
Joanna Newsom (CA, *82 cp ahau), Devendra Banhart (Houston/TX, *81 ge 10 manik+), CocoRosie (Paris, FF)
CocoRosie/La maison de mon reve/Touch and Go (04)
Devendra Banhart/Oh Me Oh My/Young God (02)
Devendra Banhart/Rejoicing in the Hands/Young God (04)
Bell@Wire: his best ever, haunted ecstasies
Devendra Banhart/Nino Rojo/Young God (04)
Joanna Newsom/The Milk-Eyed Mender (04)
CocoRosie/Noah’s Ark (05)
Devendra Banhart/Cripple Crow/XL (05)
Joanna Newsom/Ys/Drag City (06)
CocoRosie/The Adventures of Ghosthorse and Stillborn/Touch and Go (07)
Devendra Banhart/Smokey Rolls Down Thunder Canyon/XL (07)
Devendra Banhart/What Will We Be/Warner Bros (09)
my tags: evening breeze penetration folk
Bell@Wire: ‘Angelika’ is rewrite of Velvet Underground’s I’ll Be Your Mirror;
Goin’ Back = JJ Cale, ‘Rats’ = Jeff Buckley
Joanna Newsom/Have One On Me/Drag City (10): Mega-sized Laurie Anderson ambition used to tackle not America, but love and foxes and fish.#6

noise-rock
Liars (LA+Berlin), Sightings (Brooklyn), Aa (Brooklyn)
Liars/They Threw Us All in a Trench and Stuck a Monument on Top/Gern Blandsten (10/01)
Liars/They Were Wrong, So We Drowned/Mute (2/04)
Liars/Drum’s Not Dead/Mute (2/06)
Liars/Liars/Mute (8/07)
Aa/gaAme/Gigantic (07)
Liars/Sisterworld/Mute (10): Veteran pounders absorb Los Angeles’s contemporary, sunny, yes-wave freak scene by osmosis.#7

drone-rock
Not Not Fun label
Robedoor

dub techno/ambient dub
Deadbeat (CA->Berlin), Anders Ilar, Fenin, Pole
Deadbeat/Something Borrowed, Something Blue (04)
Deadbeat/New World Observer (05)
Deadbeat/Journeyman’s Annual (07)
Anders Ilar/Ludwijka
Fenin/Been Through

dubstep (2005-2008) [London]
2-step garage+house+…, Hyberdub label etc
Mugwump@Quietus: bass-virus mutations of Hyperdub, whose possessed meat-puppet Kode9 still invokes London as the point of infection despite the label’s astonishing international roster of artists
Burial, Shackleton, Kode9, Appleblim, Vex’d (London, MM), Scuba
Vex’d/Degenerate/Planet Mu (05)
Burial/Burial/Hyperdub (06)
Burial/Untrue/Hyperdub (07)
VA/Skull Disco – Soundboy Punishments
Vex’d/Cloud Seed (10)

post-dubstep [London]
these producers infected dubstep with the hyperactive blip’n’fizz of the Sega soundtracks of their formative years (Wire)
Zomby, Rustie, Ikonika, Joker

folk
Marissa Nadler (DC, *81 ta 8 eb*), Jana Hunter (Baltimore), Rio en Medio, Big Blood
Marissa Nadler/The Saga of Mayflower May (7/05)
Jana Hunter/Blank Unstaring Heirs of Doom/Gnomonsong (10/05)
Marissa Nadler/Songs III: Bird on the Water (3/07)
Jana Hunter/There’s No Home/Gnomonsong (4/07)
Marissa Nadler/Little Hells (3/09): Folk-dreamer sprouts out. When bleak, loss has a scent; when joyous, 4AD builds a beach house.#7
Big Blood + The Grove

sludge metal
Om, Habsyll (FR)

dream pop
Beach House (Baltimore, FM), Girls
Beach House/Beach House/Carpark (06): PF 8.1
Beach House/Devotion/Carpark (2/08): PF 8.5
Beach House/Teen Dream/Sub Pop (1/10): Sputtering out of the cuddlegaze muck into bold indie rock hooks—luckily they have them.#6.5; PF 9.0

singer-songwriter
DM Stith/Heavy Ghost
Sir Tralala
Patrick Watson/Wooden Arms
White Flight/White Ark
Magic Arm/Make Lists Do Something
Emily Wells/Beautiful Sleepyhead and the Laughing Yaks (06)
Timber Timbre/Timber Timbre (09)
Boduf Songs/Lion Devours the Sun
Ruby Throat
Charlotte Gainsbourg/IRM (09)
David Sylvian/Manafon/Samadhisound (09): a timbrally subtle set of hermit-like song utterances (Wire)
Fink/Sort of Revolution (09)
Hanne Hukkelberg
B Fachada/B Fachada
Jeremy Jay/Slow Dance (09)
Juana Molina
Jose Gonzalez/In Our Nature
Xiu Xiu
Liger – Crash Symbols (2009): xiuxiu.at
Former Ghosts/Fleurs/Upset The Rhythm (Stewart/Xiu Xiu+F Ruppert+Zola Jesus): Richardson@Wire: darkened subverted synth-pop

post-classical/neo-classical/quasi-classical [intl]
Max Richter, Hauschka, Loscil, Elegi, Johann Johannsson, Richard Skelton (Lancashire/UK, aka A Broken Consort, v 04 stratil artist wife),
36, Jacaszek, Sylvain Chauveau, Andrew Chalk (M, zahadny-moc o sebe nedava vediet), On (Chauveau+Hess+Sten; death ambient), Aaron Martin (Kansas)
Max Richter/The Blue Notebooks/Fat Cat (04)
36/Hypersona
Johann Johannsson/Fordlandia/Advance (08)
On/Your naked ghost comes back at night/Type (09)
Jacaszek/Treny/Miasmah (08)
Richard Skelton/Landings/Type (09)
my tags: pärt, site-specific, emotional, post-classical
Moline@Wire: Pärt’s children: Skelton, Richter, Hauschka, Johannsson (user-friendly form of meditative instrumental music homaging 80s+90s
Holy Minimalist style of Part/Tavener/Gorecki);
overdubbing simple, repetitive phrases using bowed guitar, teasing out as many harmonics as possible from the metal strings and
allowing them to clash as the melodies run in and out of sync;
z miest si do studia prinasa kamene, konare, droty, kosti, nenahrava priamo na lokaciach, to evoke the place + inspire the music:
“flint for the memory”;
vysla k nim aj poeticka kniha via blog via dennik projektu
Andrew Chalk/The Cable House/Faraway Press
Loscil/Endless Falls (10)
Aaron Martin/Chautauqua/Preservation
Barnes@Wire: found sound samples; ‘core’ ensemble of organ, banjo and cello; a la Beach Boys’ Cabinessence & The Books

glitch-hop [LA]
Flying Lotus (LA, M), Nosaj Thing (LA, M, *85), Gonjasufi (Las Vegas, M, rapper-singer-yoga teacher), Daddy Kev
Flying Lotus/Los Angeles/Warp (6/08)
Nosaj Thing/Drift/Alpha Pup (6/09): The Tricky to Flying Lotus’s Portishead.#6.5; PF 7.9
Gonjasufi/A Sufi And A Killer/Warp (2/10): desert sufi psychedelia meets lo-fi psych-glitch hop; A demented blast of pitch black hookah smoke that does for Turkish funk what Dilla did for American.#7.5; PF 8.4
Muggs@Wire: slip-sliding manipulation of loose rhythms, fuzzy psychedelic records and instrumental sounds new and old plays powerful games
with experiences of cultural deja vu and false memory, blurring the kitsch with the visceral and the playful with the raw and threatening;
cracked voice
Flying Lotus/Cosmogramma (10)

chillwave/glo-fi (2009) [US]
chillwave by blogger Carles (Hipster Runoff)
mushy textures, summery melodies, tape distortion ~ Toro Y Moi (SC, M), Memory Tapes (NJ, M), Neon Indian (Austin/NYC, M+FMM, *89, PF: best new music), Washed Out (SC, M) ~ jj, Pocahaunted, Ducktails (summery escapism) ~ 03/10 @WSJ
Memory Tapes/Seek Magic/Sth in Construction (8/09): Chill project wave fi drugs gaze pseudonym summer dream dance art blog hazy 2009 nostalgia bedroom.#4.5
Washed Out/Life Of Leisure/Mexican Summer (9/09): Tears For Fears via Ariel Pink hiss-wave, a too-cold entry into the Nite Jewel sweepstakes.#5
Neon Indian/Psychic Chasms/Lefse (10/09): Hazy gloopcore gets brighter moths, superer rainbows.#6
Toro Y Moi/Causers Of This/Carpark (02/10): Prefuse blues makes them smarter, funkier than drab chillwave peers. But better? #5.5

wonky
Adam Harper, Alex Williams (http://splinteringboneashes.blogspot.com/search?q=wonky): hauntology and ‘wonky’ are aesthetic siblings.

hauntology [UK]
by Mark Fisher and Simon Reynolds (The Wire 273, *mid-2000s): coined chiefly in response to the music of UK label Ghost Box
Adam Harper@roguesfoam: ‘playback hauntologists’: The Caretaker, Basinski and Indignant Senility
Mugwump@Quietus: the paradoxical retro-futurist real-world mythologies of the Ghost Box label with related (Broadcast) and parallel travellers (Moon Wiring Club, Position Normal)
Belbury Poly/From An Ancient Star/Ghost Box: incorporated shades of disco and dub
Broadcast + The Focus Group/Investigate Witch Cults Of The Radio Age/Warp (09) (Warp’s James Cargill+Trish Keenan & Ghost Box’s Julian House):
a chemical wedding of pop-sike bliss, cut-up weird audio and occult sonics; dark monarchs of hauntology’s expanding kingdom;
untethering slippage and slurring of loops and rhythms, a new approach to sampling that perhaps better represents the way music really
sits in our memory (Wire)
Seeland/Tomorrow Today/Advance (09) (Tim Felton ex-Broadcast, Billy Bainbridge ex-Plone):
marries antique futurist textures to attractive pop songcraft (Wire)
James Kirby (aka The Caretaker, The Stranger and Leyland Kirby)
Moon Wiring Club
Position Normal/Goodly Time/Rum (00) (London, Chris Bailiff and John Cushway, MM?, *93): proto-hauntology
Position Normal/Position Normal/Rum (09)
The Advisory Circle
The Caretaker
Mordant Music
Wooden Veil (Berlin)

hypnagogic pop [US]
by David Keenan (The Wire, *09): US underground’s equivalent strain of hauntology
these artists turned away from the bleak grind of Noise to embrace the fuzzily remembered forms of their childhoods, including soft rock and New Age.
for them, the vague recollection of a zero-budget sci-fi flick watched once during a sleepover takes on a mythic, almost occult quality,
ripe for processing via cheap technology into a sound that oscillates bwn the naggingly familiar and the utterly alien (Wire)
James Ferraro, Pocahaunted, Emeralds, Daniel Lopatin (of Oneohtrix Point Never; of Infinity Window), Inca Ore (Eva Saelens, F, Not Not Fun),
Ducktails, High Wolf
James Ferraro/KFC City 3099 Pt 1: Toxic Spill: lo-definition joyride through the polluted swamps of US cultural half-memory (Wire)
Pocahaunted: scrawled connections between free folk, LA-period Fleetwood Mac and dub with joyous abandon (Wire)
Emeralds & Oneohtrix Point Never: drag the beatless meditations of Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream through a prism of 1980s pulp culture,
accumulating layers of ectoplasmic residue which allow their music to glow with an unearthly, greenish-blue beauty (Wire)
Oneohtrix Point Never/Rifts/No Fun Prod (Daniel Lopatin, Brooklyn, M)
my tags: synth, cinematic, timbral, lost in space, spaceship, lo
Wuethrich@Wire: keyboard polysynth; “timbral fascism”;
musical narrative of an astronaut lost in space, his subsequent wanderings on an uninhabited planet and his old-age reflection on that time;
realignment of low-rent pop culture from the 70s+80s, abandoned synth timbres and obsolete consumere electronics
Inca Ore & Ducktails & High Wolf: material resonant with a distressed nostalgia for halcyon days (Wire)

witch house/drag (2010) [US]
taking the familiar dubby beats and haunting, pitch-shifted vocals and adding a more ambient, droney take to it that’s as beautiful as it is bleak + nekriticka laska k reverbu
Salem, Mater Suspiria Vision, White Ring (MF), oOoOO
White Ring, http://www.myspace.com/whytering
oOoOO, http://www.myspace.com/wkwkwkwkwkwkwkwk

piano
last.fm/…
Alva Noto/Ryuichi Sakamoto; William Basinski?; Yann Tiersen+Shannon Wright; Tiago Sousa+Joao Correia; Balmorrhea?; The Dead Texan?; Musette (SW)
Yann Tiersen+Shannon Wright/Pale White
Hauschka/Versions of the prepared piano
Musette/Datum
Magda Mayas/Heartland (10)

gitara
last.fm/…
Bill Orcutt; Christopher Riggs; James Blackshaw; Bill Nace; John Zorn (Film Works); Gabriel Araujo; Ilyas Ahmed; Porto
Gabriel Araujo/st
James Blackshaw/The Glass Bead Game/Young God (09)
Ilyas Ahmed/Goner/Root Strata (09)
Jim O’Rourke/Visitor/Drag City (09): visiting alien struggling to master American AOR: a deceptively sweet confection of blue-sky acoustic guitar, rustic banjo, organ, woodwinds, piano and drums (Wire)

cello
Hildur Gudnadottir/Without Sinking/Touch (09)
Lost in Hildurness/Mount A

jazz
Supersilent; Swami LatePlate; Kilimanjaro Darkjazz Ensemble; Kammerflimmer Kollektief; Bohren & Der Club of Gore; The Necks (Sydney)
Supersilent/9 (09)
Beequeen/The Bodyshop

freeform (post-Residents)
No-Neck Blues Band (NYC), ?Vindicatrix, ?Position Normal

obskurne fenomeny?

field recordings
Chris Watson, Alesandro Bosetti, BJ Nilsen, Jez riley French
BJ Nilsen/Invisible City/Touch

mediale musik
(zo zahrobia)

generative music
(aymeric etc)

Lecture at Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía, Madrid, 2 November 2009

There is no longer an outside
The commons are inside the space of capitalism

If somebody violates an artwork protected by a Creative Commons licence, a ‘traditional’ tribunal is meant to intervene.
To defend the the commons we rely on the force of the public, on the public force — that is the State.
The ‘legal code’ of Creative Commons licences: “The work is protected by copyright”

A sort of new ‘capitalism without intellectual property’ (Google, Facebook) is emerging and supporting the flows of free culture produced by the digital multitudes.

If the new cultural commons want to escape the typical modern opposition between public and private, they have to focus on their productive power, on their living knowledge before it is turned into a legal object or a cognitive commodity.

In the school of Italian post-operaismo, similarly, a new understanding of rent emerged recently.
Within cognitive capitalism the leading business model is said to be based on rent rather than
profit. ‘The rent is the new profit’.

If rent is becoming the dominant model of the knowledge economy, which should be the political
response? Sabotage of value (like @ dotcom crash; mortgage crisis) — the sabotage of rent.

we support P2P practices as they represent a sabotage of cognitive and speculative rent on a massive scale. Target of knowledge sharing and peer-to-peer networks is the regime of rent rather than the copyright regime.

cau palo! by ma zaujimalo co si myslis o tomto, mozno ta to zaujme – suvisi s temou individuacie – na druhej strane sa to da tiez citat ako ezotericka literatura -)

najprv hovori o ‘flexibilnej subjektivite’, ktoru datuje od protestnych hnuti v 60s, a ktoru dnes povazuje za vsadepritomnu:

We all now have available a flexible and processual subjectivity as instituted by the counter-cultural movements; In the present, the most common destiny of flexible subjectivity and of the freedom of creation that accompanies it is not the invention of forms of expression motivated by an attention to sensations that signal the effects of the other’s existence within our resonant body. What guides us in this creation of territories for our post-Fordist flexibility is an almost hypnotic identification with the images of the world broadcast by advertising and mass culture.

[..] By offering ready-made territories to subjectivities rendered fragile by deterritorialization, these images tend to soothe their unrest, thus contributing to the deafness of their resonant body, and therefore to its invulnerability to the affects of the time that are presented within it. But that may not be the most deadly aspect of this politics of subjectivation, which instead is the very message that such images invariably convey, independently of their style or their target-public. At stake here is the idea that there exist paradises, that these are now in this world and not beyond it, and above all, that certain people have the privilege of inhabiting them. What is more, such images transmit the illusion that we could be one of these VIPs, if we simply invested all our vital energy – our desire, affect, knowledge, intellect, eroticism, imagination, action, etc. – in order to actualize these virtual worlds of signs in our own existence, through the consumption of the objects and services they propose to us.

[..] In other words, what the Western idea of a promised paradise amounts to is a refusal of life in its immanent nature as an impulse to continuous processes of creation and differentiation. In its terrestrial version, capital has replaced God in his function as keeper of the promise, and the virtue that makes us worthy of it now becomes consumption: this is what constitutes the fundamental myth of advanced capitalism.

…a potom cast co ma zaujima, kde hovori o subjektivite v post-totalitnych krajinach:

If we approach the totalitarian regimes (Latin America, Eastern Europe) not by their visible or macropolitical side, but instead by their invisible or micropolitical side, we can see that what characterizes such regimes is the pathological rigidity of the identity principle. [..] Destructively conservative, the totalitarian states go much further than a simple scorn or censorship of the expressions of the resonant body: they obstinately seek to disqualify and humiliate them, to the point where the force of creation, of which such expressions are the product, is so marked by the trauma of this vital terrorism that it finally blocks itself off, and is thereby reduced to silence.

It is not hard to imagine that the meeting of these two regimes makes up a scenario even more vulnerable to the abuses of pimping: in its penetration to totalitarian contexts, cultural capitalism took advantage of the experimental past which was exceptionally audacious and singular in many of those countries; but above all, it took advantage of the wounds inflicted on the forces of creation by the blows they had suffered. The new regime presented itself not only as the system that could welcome and institutionalize the principle of the production of subjectivity and culture by the movements of the 1960s and 70s, as had been the case in the United States and in the countries of Western Europe. In the countries under dictatorships it gained an extra power of seduction: its apparent condition as a savior come to liberate the energy of creation from its bonds, to cure it of its debilitated state, allowing it to reactivate and manifest itself again.

..cize tuzba po identifikacii s medializovanymi rajmi je v posttotalitnych krajinach este silnejsia ako na zapade ‘vdaka’ silne konzervativnej politike identity pocas diktatury..

ide len o esej, nema to tam nicim moc podlozene, ale aj tak mi to pride zaujimave.. hm… treba to brat tak ze Rolnik je (brazilska) psychoanalyticka…. (btw s Guattarim napisala knihu o mikropolitike)

http://transform.eipcp.net/transversal/1106/rolnik/en

– till early 60s: disciplinary Fordist regime; politics of identity reigned in subjectivity; rejection of a resonant body;
– then crisis – cultural movements called for “l’imagination au pouvoir”
– new: * flexible subjectivity; “counter-culture”; radical experimentation with modes of existence and cultural creation which shattered the “bourgeois” lifestyle at its politics of desire, with its logic of identity, its relation to otherness and its culture;
– today: we all now have available a flexible and processual subjectivity as instituted by the counter-cultural movements; In the present, the most common destiny of flexible subjectivity and of the freedom of creation that accompanies it is not the invention of forms of expression motivated by an attention to sensations that signal the effects of the other’s existence within our resonant body. What guides us in this creation of territories for our post-Fordist flexibility is an almost hypnotic identification with the images of the world broadcast by advertising and mass culture.
+
By offering ready-made territories to subjectivities rendered fragile by deterritorialization, these images tend to soothe their unrest, thus contributing to the deafness of their resonant body, and therefore to its invulnerability to the affects of the time that are presented within it. But that may not be the most deadly aspect of this politics of subjectivation, which instead is the very message that such images invariably convey, independently of their style or their target-public. At stake here is the idea that there exist paradises, that these are now in this world and not beyond it, and above all, that certain people have the privilege of inhabiting them. What is more, such images transmit the illusion that we could be one of these VIPs, if we simply invested all our vital energy – our desire, affect, knowledge, intellect, eroticism, imagination, action, etc. – in order to actualize these virtual worlds of signs in our own existence, through the consumption of the objects and services they propose to us.

What we are faced with here is a new élan for the idea of paradise developed by Judeo-Christian religions: the mirage of a smoothed-over, stable life under perfect control. This kind of hallucination has its origin in the refusal of one’s vulnerability to the other and to the deterritorrializing turbulence that he or she provokes; and also in the disdain for fragility that necessarily derives from such an experience. This fragility is nonetheless essential because it indicates the crisis of a certain diagram of sensibility, its modes of expression, its cartographies of meaning. By disdaining fragility, it does not call up the desire for creation anymore; instead it provokes a sentiment of humiliation and shame whose result is the blockage of the vital process. In other words, what the Western idea of a promised paradise amounts to is a refusal of life in its immanent nature as an impulse to continuous processes of creation and differentiation. In its terrestrial version, capital has replaced God in his function as keeper of the promise, and the virtue that makes us worthy of it now becomes consumption: this is what constitutes the fundamental myth of advanced capitalism. In such a context, it is at the very least mistaken to consider that we lack myths today: it is precisely through our belief in this religious myth of neoliberalism, that the image-worlds produced by this regime turn into concrete reality in our own existence.

This kind of pimping of the creative force is what has been transforming the planet into a gigantic marketplace, expanding at an exponential rate, either by including its inhabitants as hyperactive zombies or by excluding them as human trash.

The seducer conjures up a spellbinding idealization that leads the seduced to identify with the seducer and submit to him: that is to say, to identify with and submit to the aggressor, impelled by an inner desire, in hopes of being recognized and admitted into the seducer’s world.

even greater in the countries of Latin America and Eastern Europe which, like Brazil, were under totalitarian regimes at the moment when financial capitalism took hold. Let us not forget that the “democratic opening” of these countries, which took place during the 1980s, was partially due to the advent of the post-Fordist regime, whose flexibility could only encounter the rigidity of the totalitarian systems as an obstacle.

If we approach the totalitarian regimes not by their visible or macropolitical side, but instead by their invisible or micropolitical side, we can see that what characterizes such regimes is the pathological rigidity of the identity principle. This holds for totalitarianisms of the Right and the Left, since from the viewpoint of the politics of subjectivation such regimes are not so different.

For them, such a threshold does not summon up an urgency to create, but on the contrary, to preserve the established order at any price. Destructively conservative, the totalitarian states go much further than a simple scorn or censorship of the expressions of the resonant body: they obstinately seek to disqualify and humiliate them, to the point where the force of creation, of which such expressions are the product, is so marked by the trauma of this vital terrorism that it finally blocks itself off, and is thereby reduced to silence

It is not hard to imagine that the meeting of these two regimes makes up a scenario even more vulnerable to the abuses of pimping: in its penetration to totalitarian contexts, cultural capitalism took advantage of the experimental past which was exceptionally audacious and singular in many of those countries; but above all, it took advantage of the wounds inflicted on the forces of creation by the blows they had suffered. The new regime presented itself not only as the system that could welcome and institutionalize the principle of the production of subjectivity and culture by the movements of the 1960s and 70s, as had been the case in the United States and in the countries of Western Europe. In the countries under dictatorships it gained an extra power of seduction: its apparent condition as a savior come to liberate the energy of creation from its bonds, to cure it of its debilitated state, allowing it to reactivate and manifest itself again.

media art undone conf @ TM 07.
Arns: drop ‘media’ from media art because we live media (via Kittler). media art is more contemporary than contemporary art.
Lialina: move media art to blogs.
Druckrey: force ourselves to start to think as art historians but by not becoming art historians but by re-writing the way art history has been written on our terms. Though I used this example of art in 1900 or october school, I don’t count them as an opposition. I just count them as those who have decided to speak for an entire 20st century, half of which belongs not to them but to us.

pavel skopal:
zdar, tu knihu ani autora neznám a popravdì dobrovolnì bych ji neèetl:)
ale zdá se, ¾e to mù¾e být v oblasti media studies/visual studies docela
dùle¾itý text,
na obalu knihy ji chválí Cubitt a Mirzoeff, to jsou ¹pièky, a dal¹í
známá figura, Steven Shaviro,
ji velebí tady: http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=561
nemyslím, ¾e ji bude u nás nìkdo podrobnìji znát, ¹anci by jsi mìl mo¾ná
u lidí z pra¾ské katedry filmových studií –
Petra Hanáková, Kateøina Svatoòová, Sylva Poláková, nebo mimo obor filmu
tøeba Ladislav Kessner.

Beller recasts marx’s theory of alienation, and of value into a simple film setting

cinema, tv, video, computer, internet = deterritorialised factory
imaginal functions are part of perception
‘cinema’ as social relation = sociality
image is mise-en-scene of work
social theory needs become film theory
looking = (value-productive) labour
we labour in the image
‘attention theory of value’ ~ ‘labour’ = source of all value production
human attention = production of value for late capital
attentional biopower is transferred into capital
sociality = visuality
task of film theory = write political economy of culture as a mode of production
labour theory of value must be reformulated as attention theory of value

+ page-based notes @ mendeley @ umax’ windows

Myslím si, že prínos Adornovej a Horkheimerovej koncepcie kultúrneho priemyslu a dialektiky osvietenstva pre súčasnosť (i prínos frankfurtskej školy všeobecne), spočíva predovšetkým v neustálom apeli na kritického ducha, v dôraze na problematizovanie kultúrnej prítomnosti, na rozvíjanie interdisciplinárneho prístupu k jej skúmaniu, na odmietnutie fetišizácie akýchkoľvek kategórií, prostredníctvom ktorých definujeme našu kultúrnu prítomnosť a na využívanie dialektickej metódy, ktorá zabraňuje statickému a ahistorickému videniu kultúry.

Zároveň som presvedčená, že koncepcia kultúrneho priemyslu je vo svojej pôvodnej podobe len veľmi málo využiteľná v súčasnej kultúrnej teórii a výskume. Adornov a Horkheimerov prístup k masovej kultúre nie je jednostranne odmietavý a pohŕdavý, ako im vytýkajú mnohí kritici, ale dialektický, tendencia ku kritickej reflexii len negatívnych aspektov až príliš prevažuje. Aplikovanie Adornovho a Horkheimerovho prístupu priam zvádza k pesimistickým teoretickým úvahám, ktoré nesmerujú k žiadnym praktickým návrhom a sústredia sa len na odhaľovanie falošnej podstaty súčasnej kultúry a spoločnosti. Vo všeobecnosti by som ako základný princíp stanovila vyhnutie sa odhaľovaniu negatívnych a seba-deštrukčných tendencií (hoci nepochybne existujú a sami ich pociťujeme) a vyhnutie sa samoúčelnému dokazovaniu využiteľnosti Adornovej a Horkheimerovej koncepcie a platnosti všetkých ich pesimistických záverov. Naopak, je potrebné sústrediť sa na momenty emancipačné, kritické a pozitívne. Postoj kultúrneho pesimistu je v istom zmysle nesmierne lákavý, ak však chceme prekonať základné nedostatky Adornovho a Horkheimerovho modelu, mali by sme zaujať postoj „kultúrneho optimistu“. Z pozície kultúrneho optimistu, ktorého cieľom je pozitívne zužitkovať Adornovu a Horkheimerovu koncepciu, je podľa môjho názoru následne potrebné predovšetkým:

• Položiť dôraz na to, čo Adorno a Horkheimer neuskutočnili: na odhaľovanie pozitívneho potenciálu kultúrneho priemyslu a na kreatívne zapracovanie teórie kultúrneho priemyslu do rôznych projektov a výskumov.
• Zmeniť postoj k samotnej priemyselne produkovanej masovej kultúre.
• Prestať ju vnímať ako manipulujúcu jednotlivca a uprednostniť také ponímanie, v ktorom masová kultúra predstavuje priestor, v ktorom sa jednotlivec rozličnými spôsobmi pozitívne formuje.
• Vzdať sa prísneho presadzovania dialektického výskumu a obohatiť kritickú teóriu o metodológiu empirického sociologického výskumu.
• Dôraz by sa mal jednoznačne presunúť na rozvíjanie možností pre formovanie jednotlivca a formovanie emancipátorských produktov a médií.
• Rozšíriť okruh Adornom a Horkheimerom skúmaných tém v súvislosti s našou pozíciou a potrebami doby. V tejto súvislosti považujem za nesmierne podnetnú tému napríklad kultúrnu sabotáž ako undergroundové kultúrno-kritické hnutie, ktoré má post outsidera, využíva médiá, umenie a paródiu a stáva sa základom pre formovanie špecifickej subkultúry, ktorá v sebe zahŕňa aspekt kritického nazerania na súčasnú konzumnú a informačnú spoločnosť a jej komodifikovanú kultúru a vyjadruje vlastný postoj umeleckými prostriedkami. Téma kultúrnej sabotáže zároveň otvára široký priestor pre skúmanie svojho vplyvu na rozvíjanie kreatívneho myslenia recipientov – aktívnych divákov.

re:
pozeram ze na Kellnerovi si stavala ) tyjo a tiez pozeram, ze v ceskoslovensku sa o nich prestalo pisat v 70-tych rokoch…. resp. potom len zmienky u Budila, Fajkusa a Faya, to je celkom bieda…
to je fajn, ze na to upozornujes v zavere, ze to chyba, a vobec sa mi paci ten zaver….(!!)
magda ma inak phd temu, ktora celkom suvisi s kulturnou sabotazou — konkretne ‘aktivizmus na internete’

Dmytri Kleiner kritizuje Creative Commons aj Benklerovu ideu ‘commons-based peer-production’..

o CC hovori, ze namiesto toho aby podporovala slobodu uzivatela (napriklad GPL definuje slobodu ako 4 slobody uzivatela–to use/share/study/modify), dava autorovi ‘slobodu’ urcit uroven kontroly nad uzivatelom (teda rozne obmedzenia ako noncommercial-only/view-only atd).. cim CC neberie kontrolu z ruk producentov (co je ideou Free Culture), ani vobec nerusi rozdiel medzi producentom a konzumentom, ako tvrdi Lessig.

no a Benklerova teza z Wealth of Networks o ‘commons-based peer-production’ hovori o komunite autorov (peers), ktori spolocne tvoria v prostredi bez vlastnictva (commons). tu zas Kleiner tvrdi, ze tym ze Benklerovo commons ma imaterialnu/digitalnu povahu, tak ti co skutocne profituju v takejto situacii su ti, ktori vlastnia (materialne) prostriedky na vyrobu (nematerialnych) statkov, pretoze tvorcom neposkytuju slobodny pristup, ale na nom zarabaju. no a na to, aby autori prispievajuci do takejto commons neboli vykoristovani vlastnikmi fyzickeho materialu, treba do commons okrem virtualnych prostriedkov (softver, videa, texty, obrazky, atd) produkcie zahrnut aj materialne prostriedky..

q: “where does power lie in the global network society?”
communication is the central power in contemporary society.
via power vs counter-power; multinational corporate media networks vs creative audience; biased/scandal media politics vs insurgent grassroots media politics.
[10] defines power in a Weber-inspired way as “the relational capacity that enables a social actor to influence asymmetrically the decisions of other social actor(s) in ways that favor the empowered actor’s will, interests, and values”

[42-47,418-420] 4 kinds of power in the network society:
* networking power –
* network power
* networked power
* network-making power: “paramount form of power in the network society”; held and exercised by programmers and switchers; analysed via power struggles between the global corporate multimedia networks and the creative audience (chapter 2), the development of media policies in the USA (chapter 2), framing and counter-framing in political campaigns, especially the framing of the US public mind before, during, and after the Iraq war (chapter 3); to scandal politics in Spain in the 1990s (chapter 4), media control and censorship in the USA, Russia, and China (chapter 4); the environmental movement, the global movement against corporate globalization, the spontaneous citizens’ movement that emerged in Spain after the al-Qaeda attacks in 2004, and the Barack Obama presidential primary campaign (chapter 5).

Fuchs about “new web“:
– Tapscott and Williams claim that the “new web” brings about “a new economic democracy (…) in which we all have a lead role“ (2007)
– Kelly argues that the “new web”, where people “work toward a common goal and share their products in common, (…) contribute labor without wages and enjoy the fruits free of charge” (Kelly, 2009, p. 118) constitutes a “new socialism” – “digital socialism”. The new socialism is for Kelly a socialism, in which workers do not control and manage organizations and the material output they generate. Therefore this notion of socialism should be questioned. For Kelly, socialism lies in collective production, not in democratic economic ownership. If “socialism seeks to replace capitalism by a system in which the public interest takes precedence over the interest of private profit“, “is incompatible with the concentration of economic power in the hands of a few“, and “requires effective democratic control of the economy“ (Frankfurt Declaration of the Socialist International, 19511), then Kelly’s notion of socialism that is perfectly compatible with the existence of Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, and other web corporations (as indicated by the fact that he lists Google, Amazon, Facebook, and YouTube in his history of socialism), is not at all a notion of socialism, but one of capitalism disguised as socialism. [critique also by Lessig: http://lessig.org/blog/2009/05/et_tu_kk_aka_no_kevin_this_is.html, http://lessig.org/blog/2009/05/on_socialism_round_ii.html ]
– Castells about ‘new web’ in a refreshing techno-dialectical way that avoids the deterministic pitfalls of technooptimism and techno-pessimism. For Castells, a novel quality of communication in contemporary society is mass self-communication. The three forms of communication (interpersonal, mass communication, and mass selfcommunication) coexist, interact, and complement each other rather than substituting for one another. Castells theorizes mass self-communication based on Eco’s semiotic model of communication as the emergence of “the creative audience” (pp. 127-135) that engages in the “interactive production of meaning” (p. 132) and is based on the emergence of the figure of the “sender/addressee” (p. 130). contemporary Internet = conflict bwn global multimedia business networks that try to commodify the Internet VS “creative audience” that tries to establish a degree of citizen control of the Internet and to assert their right of communicative freedom without corporate control.

Fuchs about autonomy of communicative subjects:
– autonomy in the sense of Kant, understood as the autonomy of the will as the supreme principle of morality (Kant, 2002, p. 58), the “quality of the will of being a law to itself” (Kant, 2002, p. 63)
– autonomy as “true individualism” that Hayek (1948) had in mind, in which capitalism is conceived as spontaneous order that should be left to itself and should not be shaped by political rules (Hayek, 1988)
– autonomy as freedom of speech, taste, and assembly – “the liberty of thought and discussion” – in line with the harm principle, as postulated by John Stuart Mill (2002)
– autonomy as the existence of functionally differentiated self-referential subsystems of society (Luhmann, 1998)
– autonomy in a less individualistic sense as the combination of individual autonomy, understood as subjectivity that is “reflective and deliberative” and “frees the radical imagination” from “the enslavement of repetition” (Castoriadis, 1991, p. 164), and social autonomy, “the equal participation of all in power” (Castoriadis, 1991, p. 136; see also Castoriadis, 1998)
– theoretically unreconciled relationship of private autonomy and public autonomy that Habermas (1996, p. 84) has critically examined
– dialectic of autonomy that Habermas has in mind when he speaks of a “cooriginality of private and public autonomy” (Habermas, 1996, p. 104) achieved in a “system of rights in which private and public autonomy are internally related” (Habermas, 1996, p. 280) and “reciprocally presuppose each other” (Habermas, 1996, p. 417)
– autonomy as the “status of an organized people in an enclosed territorial unit” (Schmitt, 1996, p. 19, for a critique of this approach see Habermas, 1989)
– autonomy as a postmodern project of plural democracy with a multiplicity of subject positions (Laclau & Mouffe, 1985)

For Castells, there are the following new aspects of media politics: the use of the Internet in political campaigns (p. 230), the multiplication of entry points of political reports, on which an interaction between mainstream media and the Internet is based (p. 234), an unprecedented prevalence and significance of scandal politics (p. 246), the easy and immediate diffusion of scandal politics over the Internet by everyone (pp. 247f), an increase of the publicity and perception of corruption and of the impact on public trust (p. 289). The result would be a worldwide crisis of political legitimacy, a decline in public trust, and a crisis of democracy. These crises could possibly, but not automatically result in depoliticization, and would in many cases also create a desire for insurgent politics, social movements, and new public spaces.

as architect consider “software” of space (sounds, smell, light, temperature, electromagnetic fields, social relationships, etc) rather than “hardware” (floors, walls, roof, etc) | The City… takes everything explored in Everyware as a given, and a point of departure | not just a social networking project for sensor data | emphasis on contextually specific “environments” rather than object-centric “sensors” | Extended Environments Markup Language (EEML) | backend capable of handling millions of users | internet of things | technologies of “extreme connectivity” | ‘eco-system’ of conversant devices, buildings & environments

Pachube evolved out three strands of thought:
1) the geographical non-specificity of architecture these days as people live their lives in constant connection with people in remote spaces
2) a desire to open up the production process of “smart homes” in reaction to current trends for placing the design and construction process solely in the hands of knowledgeable others.
3) an emphasis on contextually specific “environments” rather than object-centric “sensors”
– environment is a construction process and not a medium; nor is it a state or an entity
– one of the major failings of the usual ubicomp approach is to consider the connectivity and technology at the object-level, rather than at the environment-level. It’s built into much of contemporary Western culture to be object-centric, but at the level of “environment” we talk more about context, about disposition and subjective experience.

I asked Bruce Sterling to be a “visionary” adviser because he was one of the people early on to envisage the concepts and ramifications of “spimes” (his neologism for ’space-time objects’). While I agree that “spimes” are directly relevant, what I found most important from his conception was the concept of “wrangling” – being actively and productively engaged and responsible in the development of spimed environments. I think it was a crucial leap: to talk about “wranglers” rather than “end-users”.

THIS BOOK
is sequel to Empire {which described a current form of global order as networked power of nation-states (G8), institutions (WTO, NATO, IMF) and corporations, being constituted by permanent state of (civil) war}
Empire (new global form of sovereigny–empire) => Multitude (emerging global class formation–multitude) ~ reverse of Hobbes’ De Cive (1642; social body and forms of citizenship–nascent bourgeoisie which needed political power above it as abs.authority) => Leviathan (1651; future form of sovereignty–nation-state)

PREFACE
war
democracy
multitude = possibility of democracy on a global scale; also provides means to achieve it; alternative growing within Empire; is network in which all differences can be expressed freely and equally; is not identity / the people (is unitary conception; is single identity; is one); is not uniform / the masses (are indifferent; where all colors fade to gray); is not the working class (separates workers from owners who don’t work; separates industrial workers from service/agricultural workers; separates waged workers from unpaid laborers); has good model in internet (nodes are different but connected; new can always be added); internal differences of multitude must discover (or rather produce) the common that allows them to communicate/act together (while remaining different)
shifts in global economy – industrial working class no longer plays hegemonic role in global economy; production is not only in economic terms, but social production (of communications/relationships/forms of life)
the common = not the commons (refers to pre-capitalist-shared spaces that were destroyed by advent of private property); our communication/collaboration/cooperation are not only based on the common but they in turn produce the common in expanding spiral relationship; production of the common = central to every form of social production + is primary characteristic of new dominant forms of labor today
biopolitical production = newly dominant model of production; it not only involves the production of material goods in strictly economic sense but also touches on and produces all facets of social life, economic, cultural, and political; is strong pillar of multitude
“political” organization = second pillar of multitude; resistance/revolutionary orgs as not only means to achieve democracy, but to create internally the democratic relationships
Empire = new form of global order (no longer as imperialism via nation-state extending in a foreign territory)
network power = new form of sovereignty; its nodes = dominant nation-states + supranational institutions + major capitalist corporations + other powers; is “imperial”, not “imperialist”; is tendency; unilateralism (USA as dominant power) neither multilateralism (UN) are not just desirable but not even possible; perpetual war ~ state of (civil) war is inevitable in Empire and functions as instrument of rule; imperial peace (Pax Imperii) is false pretense of peace

WAR
[12-13] war si becoming permanent social relation
Clausewitz: war is a continuation of politics by other mean; today some theorists: war is becoming the primary organizing principle of society, and politics merely one of its means or guises
Mao: politics is simply a war without bloodshed
Gramsci: political strategies: either wars of position or war of maneuver
war has become regime of biopower – form of rule aimed not only at controlling population but producing/reproducing all aspects of social life
[14-15] consequences:
– limits of war are indeterminate, both spatially and temporally
– int’l relations and domestic politics become increasingly similar and intermingled
– reorientation of conception of the sides of battle or conditions of enmity (eg against terrorism)
[38-39] shift in int’l rels: not that much 1989, as 26 may 1972, when USA+USSR signed Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which regulated nuclear weapons production of 2 superpowers ~ mass bombing like @WW2 could no longer be part of art of war; war begun to be less oriented twd defending against coherent mega-threat and more focused on proliferating mini-threats; less intent on general destruction of enemy and more inclined twd transformation or even production of enemy; high-intensity police actions (~low-intensity warfare; eg US @Vietnam or Latin Am, or USSR @Afg) rather than all-out large-scale combat
[39] early 70s: 1971 delinking US$ from gold standard; 1973 first oil crisis; bgn of destruction of welfare state; bgn of shift of hegemony of econ.prod. from factory to more social/immaterial sectors
[40-41] “military-industrial complex” = simplification eliminating any real considerations of class conflict, insurgency, and movements of multitude; term was created to name a confluence of interests in imperialist phase of capitalist development bwn major corps and state military/policy apparatus (eg. Knupp steel works and German army; Dassault aviation manufacturing and Gaullist military policies; or Lloyds insurance and British imperialist projects; or Boeing and Pentagon); now rather “military-vital complex”

MULTITUDE
[196-197] flesh of the multitude produces in common in a way that always exceeds the measure of any traditional social bodies, and it doesn’t produce chaos and social disorder, but what it produces is common, and that common we share serves as the basis for future production, in a spiral, expansive relationship (eg. communication as production: we can communicate only on the basis of languages, symbols, ideas, and relationships we share in common, and in turn the results of our communication are new common languages, symbols, ideas and relationships); today this dual relationship between production and the common–the common is produced and it is also productive–is key to understanding all social and economic activity
[198] singularities interact and communicate socially on basis of the common, and their social comm. in turn produces the common; multitude is subjectivity that emerges from this dynamic of singularity and commonality
[199] shift from habit (american pragmatist philosophy) to performance as core notion of production of the common
[202] production of the common tends to displace trad.divisions bwn individual/society, subjective/objective, private/public
[203-204] WRONG: “private” = includes the rights and freedoms of social subjects together with the rights of private property, blurring the distinction between the two. this confusion results from the ideology of “possessive individualism” in modern legal theory, that conceives every aspect/attribute of subject, from its interests and desires down to its soul, as “properties” that are owned by individual, reducing all facets of subjectivity to the economic realm; “private” = subjective + material “possessions”; “public” = state control + what is held and managed in common; WE NEED alt legal strategy/framework: conception of privacy that expresses singularity of social subjectivities (not private property) and conception of public based on the common [commonality] (not state control)–one might say a postliberal and postsocialist legal theory; good example: “postsystems theory” school, which is molecular conception of law and production of norms that is based on constant/free/open interaction among singularities, which through their communication produces common norms
[204] community = often refers to moral unity that stands above population and its interactions like sovereign power
[204] the common IS NOT community; IS NOT public; it is based on communication among singularities and emerges through collaborative social processes of production
[205] neolib. legal frameworks – privatization of public goods (water, air, land, and all systems of mgmt of life: healthcare, pensions) and privatization of public services (telecom and other network industries, post, public transp., energy sys, edu); these public goods and services were very basis of modern sovereignty in hands of nation-state

/ Sylvère Lotringer has criticized Negri and Hardt’s use of the concept for its ostensible return to the dialectical dualism in the introduction to Paulo Virno’s A Grammar of the Multitude

http://burundi.sk/monoskop/log/?p=399

problem property a problem hodnoty

(political theory)

1. Michael Hardt – Politics of the Common (2009)
michael hardt gives very good summary of current debates
about the commons. he explains the immaterial property
and the common got into centre of contemporary production
shifting away from industrial capitalist mobile/immobile
commodity properties. he says that today the capital
and economic development paradoxically relies on the common,
and that the central task for contemporary society is
to develop an alternative management of the common.
by the common he means the ecological (earth, ecosystems,
and all forms of life interacting with them) and social/cultural
(shared products of human labor–ideas, images, affects,
social relationships) domains. that is not much news,
but what is interesting – these two domains are often treated
separately, and here hardt mentions two major instances
of contradictions which link them:
contradiction between private property and the common;
and the fact that the value of common is immeasurable with
the traditional capitalist system of measures (and is rather
based on value of life, which we have not yet invented).
/ o ‘the common’ hovori ako o ekologickych (lesy, plaze,
vzduch, jazera) a nematerialnych socialnych/kulturnych
statkoch (videa, texty, fotky, idey, pocity, socialne vztahy,
zabava, nove formy zivota), ku ktorym maju (mat) vsetci
volny pristup. hovori o dvoch hlavnych rozporoch
s ohladom na klasicky system – konkretne nemoznost
urcit ich (ekonomicku) hodnotu, a problem vlastnickeho
vztahu k nim.
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/21899

2. Slavoj Zizek – Ecology: A New Opium of the Masses
tu zizek vychadza z idei commons ako ju chapu hardt a negri,
a jemne ju rozsiruje: commons ako kultura, externa
priroda (ekologia), a interna priroda (biogenetika).
tvrdi, ze je do commons zasadne zapojit aj mensiny,
populaciu vylucenu z politickych procesov.
http://www.lacan.com/zizecology1.htm
(je tam aj video prednaska)

(economy)

3. Lawrence Lessig – Remix: Making Art and Commerce
Thrive in the Hybrid Economy (2008)
to je jeho nova kniha, hovori tam o tom, ako mozu
ist dokopy ekonomika ‘komercie’ (klasicky online biznis)
a ‘zdielania’ (v ktorej nefigujuru peniaze–napr. priatelstvo
alebo P2P filesharing). odtial by bolo dobre vytiahnut
nejaku cast, ale najst nejaky sumarizujuci text, pripadne
jeho kritiku.
http://burundi.sk/monoskop/log/?p=224

4. Mikael Pawlo – What’s the meaning of “non-commercial”? (2004)
pawlo je sef svedskych iCommons a kritizuje tu fakt, ze drviva
vacsina materialov pod CC pouziva klauzulku ‘non-commercial’.
pyta sa co to znamena — a dava vela prikladov, kde sa to
co je commercial a co non-commercial neda urcit – napriklad:
verejna televizia, verejne skoly, reklamy na neziskovky,
rss-feedy embednute vo weboch na ktorych je reklama –
to su priklady, v ktorych nie je mozne urcit ci mozeme
pouzit CC videa ktore su sirene pod noncommercial licenciou.
http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00006.html

x. Bauwens – crowdfunding

(software)

5. Richard Stallmann
Stallmann v Lessigovej knihe hovori, ze free software
nie je altruizmus, ze tie veci programatori nerobia
lebo maju dobre srdce, ale spravidla maju pragmaticke
dovody. musi k tomu byt nejaky dobry clanok.

(philosophy)

6. Bernard Stiegler – transindividuation
to je francuzsky filozof, ktory sedel 7 rokov v base
za kradez v banke, a napisal tam niekolko zvazkov, ktore
prepisuju filozofiu z pohladu techniky/technologii.
bol nejaky cas sefom IRCAM, potom aj Centre Pompidou.
v poslednom case ho celkom hypuju. uz dlhsie kritizuje
web 2.0 sluzby a hovori o procese “transindividuacie”,
kedy svoj esteticky vkus menia uzivatelia medzi sebou
tym, ze zdielaju online material. nadvazuje na zabudnuteho
filozofa Simondona, ktory s tym terminom prisiel snad
este v 50-tych rokoch.
k tomu mam zatial len toto kratke video:

(commons in practise)

7. Creative Commons v cz/sk praxi
mozno interview s clovekom z cz/sk projektu, ktory dava veci
pod CC (je ich viac).

8. kauza a predaj Pirate Bay
zatial nemam tip na clanok

9.
jeden zaujimavy projekt v anglicku:
http://uniteddiversity.com/commons-creation/

(art/activism)

10. Ines Doujak – Victory Gardens
instalacia (2007) viedenskej umelkyne kritizujucej politiku USA a EU,
ktora prehliada privatizovanie verejnych statkov (vody, potravin, pody)
korporaciami prostrednictvom patentov [biopiratstvo],
najma v krajinach “mega diverzity” (mexiku, indii, brazili, indonezii).
/ Hardt: I object to calling this piracy, by the way, because pirates
at least have the dignity to steal property. These corporations steal
the common and transform it into private property.
http://www.lakeside-kunstraum.at/archiv.detail.asp?active_semprog_ID=525386989&active_topic_ID=854442775
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2008/05/raised-above-the-ground-with.php

11. Yes Men – Bhopal

[75,79]

[74]

[71-73]

[70]