Re: nettime Introducing Daria: An autonomous software artist
Hi Brian, It's a good question why Daria is a she? The short answer is that it follows a long line of precedence of men naming and referring to their machines as female. To a certain extent, this female-biased gender association is less apparent in computers (particularly large networks), in which computers are named for cities, stars, mountains, or people. It is possible though, that the moment we anthropomorphize the computer, we associate a gender, but I don'thave data one way or the other to back up such a claim. Software on the computer is a different story. For an autonomous software system that by design is to be anthropomorphized, it seemed prudent to impart a gender to the system. Hence, I chose to follow the precedence I was familiar with. With regards to the work she creates, the female form has often been used and interpreted within works of art, far more often than the male body. It makes sense to maintain this convention, considering the point/concept of the work (creating and releasing Daria) is to explore the possibilities of autonomous systems interacting with humans and integrating into their society, as opposed to the gender bias of her work. I'm not suggesting that it isn't a valid question, because it is. However, I think that the first issue needs to be raised (can autonomous systems integrate into human society? can we consider autonomous software agents as artists?) prior to questioning the validity of their work. If not, then we have already accepted the software as being a valid artist without going through the process of debate. I'm not sure I agree with the way you've prioritized the questions. Consider: if not enough people donate money and the project fails to support itself and so gets evicted by its webhost, was that because an autonomous system couldn't be integrated into human society, as you say, or was it because Daria's product sucked and nobody liked Daria's art enough to care that it be around? If the question that concerns you primarily is can autonomous systems integrate into human society? can we consider autonomous software agents as artists? then I wonder why you bother anthropomorphizing at all. Once you deliberately anthropomorphize, integration is no longer the intent; you're now trying to assimilate, and that is a different thing. Assimilation is a losing proposition because it invariably heightens difference while attempting to suppress the same. If Daria is supposed to be comparable somehow to human artists, at least more so than other things that are just tools, then all the ways in which Daria is like or unlike artists beg for scrutiny. Among them, the patterns in image choice exercised by Daria, which in her/its case are sexist in an utterly banal way. I'm not saying that the anthropomorphosis kills the project, only that without it I might have been less disappointed by Daria's product. Because once you tell me Daria is an artist, I can only wonder, good artist or bad artist, an artist who makes work that excites, entertains, and edifies, or an artist whose work wastes the time of the viewer? Really, even if we allow that Daria can be an artist, how good an artist can Daria be? If I find the answer to be the negative, then it's a Pyrrhic victory for the assimilationists, no? Where I veer from convention is by creating a solid delineation between Daria and me. Other artists create machines that create art and the question has been raised whether it is the machine or the creator that creates the art? The resounding answer has been that it is ultimately the creator of the machine that creates the art. But what if that isn't the case? I think it raises a number of important questions about identity, ownership, and society that will become increasingly more important as fields such as artificial intelligence and biotechnology continue to advance. I agree that these are important questions. What I suggest is that by so casually relying on those cultural/social conventions as you do at the formative level of Daria's personality, you've conceded the questioning of *those* conventions in ways that may subtly undermine the asking of the others. Dan w. Regards, Brian Quoting Dan S. Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: What makes Daria a she? Does it have something to do with all the collaged naked female breasts in her art works? Could we say that her governing algorithm is gendered? dsw # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
Re: nettime Reducing military spending
Or just steals the US robots and reprograms them? Best, Michael On Feb 16, 2005, at 6:47 PM, Ivo Skoric wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/16/technology/16robots.html?pagewanted= 1ei=5094en=527b7e950d00d351hpex=1108616400partner=homepage Pentagon says that an average soldier's upkeep, training, and retirement costs about $4 million. That's tax-payers money. If the soldier is replaced by a robot, that would cost only $230K per piece. And the cost of maintenance, of course, shich hopefully would be less than $4M. Although one never knows with new and untested technology. And where are they going to make them? In China? ... # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and info nettime-l in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
nettime Towards a Critical Analysis of Media EmergenC
http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/107671.shtml --- Towards a Critical Analysis of Media EmergenC Introduction - From October 6th-9th, as the National Association of Broadcasters was holding their annual Radio Road Show in San Diego, a group of media activists converged to try to illuminate what is wrong with the corporate media and to strengthen independent, community autonomous media. This convergence was called the Media emergenC, highlighting the two themes of emergency and emergence. With 4 days of talks, film screenings, marches, panels, forums and independent media making, the media activists, mostly composed of members of San Diego Indymedia and radioActive sanDiego, but including media makers from as far away as New York and Philadelphia, tried to confront the NAB as had been done in many other cities, but also to challenge the independent media movement and push it forward. For an overview of the events, see: http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/106129.shtml Independent Media Coverage -- The Prometheus Radio Project, after trying out a community reporter program at the Philadelphia NAB Radio Show in 2003, was eager to take this program to San Diego in 2004. Prometheus secured local reporters in Philadelphia, as well as some community reporters who'd be coming in from the Chesapeake Bay, and others from Baltimore, NAB press passes. Community radio stations, primarily Low Power FM stations all over the country, provided the press credentials to these reporters. Then, these reporters collected audio inside the NAB convention, which would otherwise cost between $400-$700 for entry. This audio was processed into headlines, print articles, and longer audio pieces for some of these stations. The same stations, for the most part, provided credentials to local San Diego reporters, as well as reporters flying in from New York (!) and other exotic places. These reporters went into the NAB in San Diego, and collected a wide variety of audio for production. What were the goals here? First, to form relationships between community reporters and community radio stations all across the country. It was originally a hope of Prometheus and some of the participating stations that these reporters and their contacts at the home stations might decide to work together in the future, and provide regional/beat reporting to the local stations even from far away. This ties in to the larger goal of networking stations to other stations more effectively, and sharing content/beats. Second, to get representatives of independent media into workshops and forums where they almost never go. The National Association of Broadcasters is a very closed organization, and its behaviors have a great impact on community media and its ability to proliferate (ex. the LPFM expansion). If our reporters can hear about the planned strategies of the corporate media, and bring them to the stations who might suffer the impact, or those community members who might want to fight for more accesses, then we've succeeded in really penetrating the NAB. Third, to teach ourselves audio production, and try to bring new community producers into the larger stream (Free Speech Radio News, Critical Mass Radio, Indymedia audio). New blood! Fourth, to form relationships between reporters. New allies and friends! Fifth, to create finished pieces that told the story of NAB resistance, in a fashion that could be widely distributed amongst a wide variety of radio stations and communities. Mixed between resistance outside, the counter-conference, and reporting inside. How many of these goals were met? Were relationships between reporters and stations made? Nope, not really. We didn't turn in most of the audio, because we didn't finish producing much in SD and followup work wasn't kept up after the convergence. Did we get representatives into the NAB? Yes. And they asked amazing questions of people who everyday community radio folks never get to engage, like head counsel of the FCC, John Cody, and John Hogan, the president of Clear Channel. And they were present as community radio stations, showing themselves to this community of commercial broadcasters, large and small. That simple visibility makes a difference when the community of the NAB is using its girth to affect regulations at the FCC. If they, even for a moment, remember the motley crew inside the NAB, asking challenging but well-thought out and responsible questions, then that might make a difference. (This is not a radical analysis, rather it is grounded in changing the NAB and its constituents from the inside... we are, however, interested in working on and discussing radical analysis) Did we learn audio production? I think so, to a large extent. But in San Diego we hadn't prepared an editing lab that made it easy for
