Right…. تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others
-----Original Message----- From: gabbydott <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 12:38 PM Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: What could the internet be? I prefer the social romantic quote from Facil to this quote here. New times demand new imagery to hurt and to ridicule. Am Sonntag, 15. Februar 2015 schrieb Molly : > http://youtu.be/sZrgxHvNNUc > > On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 6:20:05 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: >> >> That's true Molly. I'm only Oliver asking for more. >> >> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 8:45:34 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>> >>> No doubt the current event stuff is conCOCKted and restricted. Net >>> neutrality in the US is presented as not allowing broadband vendors doing >>> what the government already does. Though all that crap, we can still manage >>> to extend our reach and ourselves in ways that raise consciousness (McLuhan) >>> >>> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 12:13:03 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: >>>> >>>> Foucault (1979) put forward some ideas on what would happen as >>>> information technology took hold (The Postmodern Condition: a report on >>>> knowledge). Essentially, the professor would be less a repository of >>>> facts as we got free access to these. Much of this literature would glow >>>> bright from Gabby's red pen. Quite a few have taken Fuller's view on how >>>> to get more material into public scrutiny. These should include the >>>> distribution and circulation of knowledge claims. The task of social >>>> epistemology of science, according to Fuller, should be regulation of the >>>> production of knowledge by regulating the rhetorical, technological, and >>>> administrative means of its communication. While there has not been much >>>> uptake of Fuller's proposals as articulated, Lee's work begins to make >>>> detailed recommendations that take into account the current structures of >>>> funding and communication. Fuller encounter between individual-based >>>> social epistemology with its focus on testimony and disagreement as >>>> transactions among individuals and the more fully social epistemologies >>>> that take social relations or interaction as partially constitutive of >>>> empirical knowledge, is the goal. >>>> >>>> Whatever this mouthful says, much is not on the internet because >>>> existing power interests have prevented it. A new business model with >>>> countervailing structures is not really emerging. The lack of progress is >>>> not surprising, but I suspect most of us don't know how much has been >>>> blocked. >>>> >>>> >>>> Fuller, Steve, 1988. Social Epistemology, Bloomington, IN: Indiana >>>> University Press. >>>> Lee, Carole J., 2012. “A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on >>>> Peer Review,” Philosophy of Science, 79(5): 859–870. >>>> –––, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang, and Blaise Cronin, 2013, “Bias in >>>> Peer Review,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and >>>> Technology, 64(1): 2–17. >>>> >>>> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 3:14:39 PM UTC, archytas wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Welcome Twirly - you sound remarkably like someone else. We'll be >>>>> playing our cards right soon. I'm glad you bought a pair of Facil's >>>>> boots. Allan seems to have been filling his. The question probably >>>>> concerns what expert knowledge is. There is now a long history of what it >>>>> wasn't. Think clerks trying to smash Babbage's counting machine or >>>>> Luddites on machinery generally. The shipyards I worked in were full of >>>>> expert skills not actually needed in building ships. We have embedded a >>>>> lot of work skill in technology. The resistance of the allocation class >>>>> has been aggressive. >>>>> >>>>> Do??? - there must be some German distinction between knowing that and >>>>> knowing how - wohl wissend, dass and zu wissen, wie? Finding the root >>>>> metaphors is quite difficult. People are reluctant to show you what they >>>>> actually do; perhaps beyond your category error and being left trying to >>>>> model a non-slip process with grease. We have plenty of examples of TPM >>>>> (total production maintenance) as you say. Teachers, lawyers, >>>>> accountants, >>>>> managers and politicians all claim expert knowledge. The expertise may be >>>>> keeping up the delusion of expertise, rather than rule following and >>>>> ability to break the rules of actual practice, a bit like a secretive form >>>>> of a soccer player allowed to carry a machine gun - think big company >>>>> tax-dodging and stuff like high frequency trading, front-running and other >>>>> investment tricks since telescopes were used to spot ships on the horizon >>>>> by commodities traders. >>>>> >>>>> Big issues, of course, concerning who controls the technology. >>>>> Currently, ownership is very restricted, to niche markets like Molly's and >>>>> those behind the smiling pussy internet and government and commercial >>>>> spying. Many still have no access. And we have no challenge to really >>>>> big >>>>> news-entertainment corporations - other than Democracy No, Real News and >>>>> illegal streams of the same old content. >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 1:46:35 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Okay. Next round. Twirly-girly at your service or at your command, >>>>>> whatever you prefer. >>>>>> >>>>>> In a different context I pulled my red pen on the sentence before the >>>>>> one that Facil marked. (Excellent video translation btw, Facil!) >>>>>> >>>>>> My main point was that you cannot do(???) expert knowledge on a root >>>>>> metaphor with a categorical break at the wrong place - if not to say on >>>>>> the >>>>>> wrong metaphor, because the same car driving training one was used. >>>>>> >>>>>> Meaning in speed and business terms, the earlier in the process you >>>>>> identify the error, the cheaper the error eradication process. >>>>>> >>>>>> I took down a different different keyword from my eternal savior's >>>>>> doings in the delusion thread, but I will take better care this time as >>>>>> to >>>>>> not have it overwritten again this time. It will be one brick of a solid >>>>>> square. >>>>>> >>>>>> Am Freitag, 13. Februar 2015 15:41:22 UTC+1 schrieb archytas: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most of my use of the internet concerns researching pretty dire >>>>>>> academic papers and books through still largely restricted access. It's >>>>>>> much cheaper than buying the stuff directly, particularly as 99% of what >>>>>>> shows up is dross. I've played with the rest to find out what is there. >>>>>>> Search is a big plus compared with rooting through stuff in a university >>>>>>> library. Now, much google search just turns up dross I don't want. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In an academic project we are interested in what is on the net >>>>>>> generally - in terms of how much of general consciousness this >>>>>>> represents. >>>>>>> Rational discussion is a tiny part of what is on the net. Techies >>>>>>> spend a >>>>>>> lot of time looking for cut and paste code and ways we might automate >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> sweep. There is a background idea that we are looking for new ways to >>>>>>> do >>>>>>> 'expert knowledge' on the metaphor of people not being able to build >>>>>>> cars >>>>>>> but able to drive them with a bit of training. My own bad is 'big >>>>>>> data' as >>>>>>> a new language that would bring a different speed to human discourse and >>>>>>> potentially control of the means of production. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lately, I'm interested in the lack of a business model for anything >>>>>>> except trash. I can join a site where a couple of young women will >>>>>>> send me >>>>>>> off-the-peg clothes on approval to ensure my sartorial elegance, though >>>>>>> don't. There are plenty of interesting Moochs, but I don't have time. >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> bank n line and have the joy of never seeing a bank clerk. Shopping can >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> done in the same manner as shops don't interest me at all. My insurance >>>>>>> renewals are always 30% higher than I can get the same cover for via >>>>>>> one of >>>>>>> the broker sites on the day. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I do electronic teaching. So I'm no longer racked by whatever >>>>>>> diseases undergraduate classes try to kill me with. And I never see a >>>>>>> boss >>>>>>> or have to attend a useless staff meeting, or have my classes flooded as >>>>>>> the students discover I'm an easier touch and tell jokes. The work is >>>>>>> more >>>>>>> or less pre-prepared and my timetable is not changed at ridiculous short >>>>>>> notice and I don't have to take time to teach kids from other classes, >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> my door because they can't get anywhere with the guy supposed to help. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can watch television and films through illegal sites, but would >>>>>>> really prefer to pay for channels where I could select from much wider >>>>>>> material without packaging. The current business model encourages >>>>>>> loads of >>>>>>> channels with the same (usually old) dross, or stuff like Netflix with >>>>>>> only >>>>>>> 1% I'd want to see and don't want to pay to support. Sports channels >>>>>>> require me to pay for soccer I don't want. Tony has done more for me >>>>>>> in a >>>>>>> few minutes (neglecting his production time) than Sky Arts bores ever >>>>>>> could. We lack a business model of actual choice. With one, >>>>>>> insanestream >>>>>>> news and other entertainment, the crap science pornography of the BBC, >>>>>>> Discovery and so on, would be things of my past. In chronic business >>>>>>> terms, I wonder how they do market segmentation at all. I am sick of >>>>>>> Blue >>>>>>> Peter (kids programme here) presentation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One can imagine plenty of people like the best through this group >>>>>>> wanting something very different and something large enough not to be a >>>>>>> part of when time presses and so on. Uber, properly supervised against >>>>>>> racist drivers, could bring very radical change - I meet few who can >>>>>>> explain why - though we have not yet worked out that technology could >>>>>>> massively reduce what we currently call work and planet burning. In the >>>>>>> meantime we can't even set up a discussion group without Gabby (and >>>>>>> everyone really) worrying on the curtain shades. Give us a twirl then >>>>>>> girl, like one of those doxies Bruce Forsythe used to encourage. I can >>>>>>> see >>>>>>> something of a business model, starting with Chris' 'attractors'. The >>>>>>> eventual key is content for a sophisticated audience - remembering very >>>>>>> few >>>>>>> people do education without any kind of accreditation pay-off and the >>>>>>> means >>>>>>> to pay for organisation does not move easily from free. Current >>>>>>> strategies >>>>>>> are advertising and the begging bowl. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/JQ9a6NzpVYU/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','minds-eye%[email protected]');> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
