Spam. "Blockchain is our mesh-odology"? "fine art is now fin-art" This guy deserves to be pinned to a wall and framed.
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM Kenneth Fields via NetBehaviour < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > My interest in blockchain is something of an attention filter. > It’s like moving house; you have to go through all your stuff > and box up only the things you NEED to bring with you; facebook, > youtube, twitter - get rid of it. > > We can simply move completely over to the next web, and as a > consequence reclaim some of the old passion of the early internet. > Time to build again; scout ahead. > > Artsmesh (http://artsmesh.com) was always meant to be decentralized, > and we achieved that goal partially - embedding gnuSocial as a repository, > but for the most part keep it focused on LIVE. With blockchain, it’s now > “Buy Live.” > > So Artsmesh is ‘banking' on the fact that the 'live event horizon' (NOW) > will become a site of value. > In other words, the closer you are to live/now, the more valuable and > trusted will be the ‘signal.’ > Live media acts as another filter, because it's a more skill-intensive > space to command. > With live presence, we share a more direct signal path; there is a > relationship of veridicality, where > no mediating entity can insinuate their non-contractual influence between > our two negotiated presences. > > So those are two filters acting on my psyche, blockchain and live. But yet > another filter > seems to be emerging, a strange movement of cutting edge research from > academia > to finance! Who would of thunk it? The white papers are exciting and ground > breaking, unlike the quicksand of much of the recent academic discourse in > the arts and tech. > > So Artsmesh is currently on the DApp/move: > https://www.stateofthedapps.com/dapps/artsmesh > > We’ll blockchain our mesh-odology (currently server based), and track > peers as bitcoin/ethereum does, > issue shared IP contracts between musicians and audience at the point of > hitting the broadcast button, > and gradually move to decentralized storage, live CDN carrier, governance > of the Mesh community > and federated intermeshes (because as easily as you can mint your own > token, you will be able to mint your own > blockchain off the Ethereum blockchain) - and as a side effect, we’ll be > able to financially support and credential > expertise outside of the old rusty vessels/institutions. > > And what about the new language of fine art - its now finArt! > > See you on the mesh. > Ken > > Syneme > Central Conservatory of Music, > Beijing, China > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2017 18:38:34 +0000 > From: ruth catlow <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [NetBehaviour] TOKENOMICS Re: comments on blockchain, art, > etc., discussion with Ruth > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > We can talk about the existence of art on the blockchain as an entry in > the ledger. > If there is no entry in a blockchain ledger the art probably does not > exist or impinge on the blockchain- and so what?! > > But I love the introduction of Beuys and Guerrilla Girls to the > conversation because their "work" purports to take place in humans > (transforming them all into artists) and the changing behaviour of systems. > > But how do we conceive of what we could call the "core" work in relation > to the economic life of a Beuys object or installation, and the > documentation of a Guerrilla Girls action? > > Here is a "tokenomics" project under development. > Could the artist consortium model explored here > < > https://medium.com/singulardtv/tokenomics-101-the-emerging-field-of-token-economics-e253b9e72ba3> > > work for us? > > Bests > Ruth > > > For entities we are claiming exist outside of the blockchain, the > data that > claims to register that existence is a proxy for them. We cannot > validate > the correctness of that claim using the blockchain's consensus rules > in the > same way we can for a simple value transaction if we wish to validate > the > fact of the registered object's existence outside of the blockchain. > Something about being outside the text. We can only validate that > person X > placed a record on the blockchain, and possibly that later they sent > it to > person Y. > > > This does seem to relate to the ontology of capital itself. > > > We use such proxies when buying and selling physical property such as > cars > or houses, or more pertinently when buying and selling conceptual art. > Certificates of authenticity for conceptual art are even more > material than > blockchain records. But I feel they are still proxies for the work > rather > than being the work, although this may just be the conceptual art fan > in me > speaking. > > > What I wonder about is in a sense the derailing of conceptual art, > which was a reaction at the time, at least among many artists, against > the materialism and mercantilism of the gallery/promotion structure. > Given that a conceptual work can be incorporated into blockchain, > which itself is an abstracting, is it necessary then to go into a > discussion of 'buying and selling conceptual art'? Isn't this a leap > which many artists, at least at the time, wouldn't make; doesn't it > reduce conceptualism to the usual marketplace phenomenology, instead > of the radical gesture that, at least for some, it embodied? For some > reason Beuys comes to mind - he wasn't a conceptualist, but his > teaching and art occupied such a radical position - as does the work > of the Guerrilla Girls etc. .. > > Hi > > > - Alan > > > - Rob. > > > > > New CD:- LIMIT: > http://www.publiceyesore.com/catalog.php?pg=3&pit=138 > email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ > web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285 <(718)%20813-3285> > current text http://www.alansondheim.org/uy.txt > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > > -- > Co-founder Co-director > Furtherfield > > www.furtherfield.org > > +44 (0) 77370 02879 > > Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i > > Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, & > debates > around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997 > > Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee > registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. > Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, > Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20171105/87984748/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > ------------------------------ > > End of NetBehaviour Digest, Vol 17, Issue 1 > ******************************************* > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > -- P Thayer, Artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
