Re: nettime Gates' Buffet, or Fail-Safe Philanthropy
On the contrary, it impresses a great many people. Presumably, that's the point of collecting so much money in the first place, if like Buffett you don't intend to leave it to your offspring. It would of course have been possible to run these businesses as non-profits, never collecting the billions to begin with. Best, Michael On Jul 3, 2006, at 9:25 AM, Nicholas Ruiz wrote: To transfer the money to his surrogate son impresses no one. # 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 The New Mediated (Em)Body Is My Others
The New Mediated (Em)Body Is My Others N_DREW The imaginary of the networked, augmented self is unitary, but the practice of this multi-user self, this multiplicity of being in the cybernated, social dataspace is far from a cohesive, organic and maintained system. Networked identity is supplemental, like a link on a page, a page on a site, a node on a network or a server in a circuitous expanse. Not only is dataspace continually invaded by the process of this other, but this realm of media saturation requires and reproduces a myriad of othernesses that shed and collect in archives and databases. These fragments of self assault the perceived purity of identity. Networked identity embodies competing notions of fluidity and fixity, of limitation and expanse, augmentation, embodiment/disembodiment, multiplicity, temporal change and stagnation and otherness. When we think about this reflectance, we are confronted with the problematics of this newly mediated self. We are challenged with the endlessly configurable in menu options and avatars. We engage in the practice of compressing ourselves into blurb-like containers, such as about me, and profiles that begin as templates of favorite movies and music, which need continual updating. We exist somewhere in the detritus memories of user names and passwords and abandoned email accounts collecting endless amounts of spam. We utilize the reflectance of media to both understand our use of the media and how we are extended through their use. Aside from the freshness and excitement of new media, we are left to wonder how these complex systems lack and how they also delimit us, and in this process, produce something supplemental and other. Archives of identifiers must be created and maintained; they are enacted upon us based upon corporate, gendered or racial components, but they lack in the biological. Their machinic logic is the cement from which we cannot escape and their supplement is the fracture we continuously attempt to heal. Even their evolution into the organic, the attempts at a biologic, are the offspring of this otherness, an artificial life, and an intermediate to our being. http://www.gameology.org/alien_other/new_mediated_em_body # 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 ISEA re:mote CFP
hi, for those nettimers that are interested in particpating in ISEA remotely see below :) adam === ISEA (International Symposium on Electronic Art)2006, an international conference held in conjunction with ZeroOne San Jose: A Global Festival of art on the Edge, will be held in San Jose, CA, August 7-13 2006. Both events are situated at the critical intersection of art and technology. ISEA2006 re:mote is a symposium within ISEA2006 and is issuing a Call for Proposals. ISEA2006 re:mote, August 10-12, 2006 International new media art discourse is stimulated by festivals and events like ISEA2006 which form temporary cultural centers to represent, present and discuss networked and digital technologies. However by forming temporary centers we also tacitly create a notion of a periphery - with temporary centers also come temporary peripheries. In new media culture this is a paradox as much new media art, theory, and discourse reflects on the network itself and the elusiveness and redundancy of centers and peripheries. ISEA2006 re:mote attempts to dissuade us from imposing these distinctions by providing a platform for artists, commentators, curators, performers and theorists to participate in ISEA 2006 via online and pre-recorded media. ISEA2006 re:mote Open Call ISEA2006 re:mote is inviting media spaces and individual artists, theorists, and curators from around the world to speak or perform via remote technologies to the audience at ISEA. Presentations to be directed at the four themes of ISEA 2006. Participants are invited to present or perform on topics included within the ISEA symposium, and onsite audience interaction with the presenters is also encouraged. ISEA re:mote will focus on presenting media spaces and people that would otherwise be excluded from presenting their work at ISEA due to financial, political, or logistical reasons. The length of each presentation can be negotiated, however, for now we have set the maximum time limit of 20 minutes. Technologies used will be up to each presenter, the premise is that the technologies should be easy for you to use and access and ISEA2006 re:mote will manage the corresponding technology requirements as much as possible onsite at ISEA2006. Live and pre-recorded material can be included. Live presentations could use any available technlogies including voice technologies such as Skype/OpenWengo/Gizmo/Linphone/Ekiga or other softphones, audio or video streams, video conferencing with softwares like ichatAV/Ekiga/Skype/OpenWengo, web cams, shared desktops using softwares like VNC/RemotePC or Remote Desktop, text chats such as irc or webchats, avatar environments, gaming environments, or even the telephone! In situations where your available bandwidth is limited or restricted, delivery of digital presentation material (audio/video) can be delivered electronically or posted by traditional mail. In all situations online presence of the presenters would be beneficial, this may take the form of IM, irc or other text based chat technologies if 'realtime' audio or video communications are not possible. Creative use of remote presentation technologies is encouraged! Time slots have to be negotiated, but we are willing to bend as much as we can to include as many people as possible from various time zones. Unfortunately there are no honoraria available for this event. ISEA2006 will feature four themes: Interactive City, Community Domain, Transvergence, and Pacific Rim. Please see the following links for further information on each on the themes: Transvergence http://01sj.org/content/view/25/71/ Interactive City http://01sj.org/content/blogcategory/23/68/ Community Domain http://01sj.org/content/view/23/69/ Pacific Rim http://01sj.org/content/blogcategory/25/70/ All proposals need only be a short paragraph outlining what you would like to present, a short bio (one paragraph), and the software, technology, or other delivery process you would like to use for the presentation. Please email this information to Adam Hyde at : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ISEA2006 re:mote is a collaboration between ISEA2006 ( http://01sj.org/ ) and Adam Hyde ( http://www.xs4all.nl/~adam http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Eadam ) and is based on the re:mote series of events: re:mote auckland - organised by r a d i o q u a l i a and ((ethermap http://www.remote.org.nz/ re:mote regina - organised by r a d i o q u a l i a and soil media lab http://soilmedia.org/remote/ === -- Adam Hyde ~/.nl selected projects http://www.xs4all.nl/~adam the streaming suitcase http://www.streamingsuitcase.com r a d i o q u a l i a http://www.radioqualia.net Free as in 'media' email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] mobile : + 31 6 186 75 356 (Netherlands mobile) # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering
nettime Who Killed the Electric Car? Important New Movie
There's an important new movie out about the fact that there were 800 electric cars dotting the roads in California in the 1990s and now they have all been crushed by their producer. And the technology that could have helped to take the auto industry into the 21st century was rejected by the auto companies. The film is Who Killed the Electric Car. Here's the url of a review I did for OhmyNews Ronda Powerful Interests Stifle Innovation Government, business conspire to kill electric car technology http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?article_class =4no=303131rel_no=1 General Motors Corporation and its offspring parts operation Delphi are currently laying off more than 50,000 unionized workers in the U.S. The companies claim that their North American operations are not profitable, and GM claims that it has to do the layoffs since it is losing market share for its cars. Given the problems that GM claims it is having in its North American operations, the newly released film Who Killed the Electric Car? offers a helpful framework from which to view the automaker's current actions. The film tells a little-known but significant story about corporate America and the U.S. government's failure to support innovation. Few in the U.S. or elsewhere know that GM had produced and leased 800 electric cars, which dotted the roads of California in the second half of the 1990s. This was a new and functioning technology, the charged-at-home battery operated automobiles. The EV1 proved not only a viable technology but also a joy to the drivers. Yet, by 2006, all the cars, with the exception of a few hidden away in some museums, had been sent by GM to a crushing station in the Arizona desert. By this time, though, a set of activists who had leased the cars and had come to love them, were monitoring what GM was doing. The fact that GM chose to destroy the cars rather than welcome the support of and enthusiastic reception by their users, highlights the disdain with which GM treated a new technology that could have revolutionized its industry and the corporation. The film was released June 30, 2006, for viewers in New York and California, and will be shown throughout the U.S in the coming months. It raises some serious and important questions about the nature of corporate-government collusion in the U.S. when it comes to the ability of a society to transition to a new technology. This was similar to a problem that plagued the former Soviet Union. The story of what happened when a functioning electric car was introduced in the U.S. helps to show the forces at play that are hostile to a society's ability to embrace a new and needed technology. The story starts in California in 1990. Plagued by high levels of smog that were very damaging to the health of its residents, the California Air Resource Board (CARB) adopted a regulation called the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate. This government entity set a series of goals for automakers selling cars in the state. It required them to produce a percentage of cars with zero emissions. The regulation would require that automakers sell 2 percent ZEV's in 1998, 5 percent in 2001 and 10 percent in 2003. In January of 1990, GM introduced a car powered by a battery at the Los Angeles Auto Show. The car was later called the EV1 (Electric Vehicle). By December 1996, GM made cars available on lease for US$400-$500 a month. Later the lease rate was reduced to $250-$300 a month. By 2000, GM was leasing 800 of the EV1s it had produced. Those leasing them found them enjoyable to drive and that they needed much less maintenance than older model cars. The batteries could be charged in one's garage overnight. There was no need to purchase gasoline or to do maintenance like oil changes. Though GM did not yet mass-produce the cars nor provide favorable publicity to let people know that they were an option for drivers, there were a number of people who learned of the cars and were willing to go through the hurdles put up by GM to be able to lease a car. The reluctance of GM to advertise the cars and offer them to drivers, however, is part of a larger story. The California regulations were an incentive for GM and other automakers to invest in and develop new technology. The state of California subsidized each EV1 leased in California. The automakers, however, did not welcome such incentives. Instead, they formed a trade organization, the American Automotive Manufacturing Association (AAMA) and set out to try to stymie the regulations. In March 1995, the AAMA circulated a confidential proposal to develop a grassroots education campaign to repeal the CARB ZEV program. Andrew Card was then the president of the AAMA and would subsequently become chief of staff in the George W. Bush White House, when the U.S. Department of Justice would join the GM and DaimlerChrysler lawsuit to end the CARB ZEV requirements. In January 2002, GM, DaimlerChrysler and several auto dealerships
