hi marc I did - I said I dont support their actions over Wikileaks. By kicking Wikileaks off it's servers, it's not behaving in neutral way - it's responding to US political pressure and is denying free speech on the Internet.
I know my tiny action wont make them change their mind, but if enough people did this I think it would put a lot of pressure on them. dave On 12 December 2010 15:39, marc garrett <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > If you are leaving them make sure they know why... > > marc > >> Have just received an email from Amazon asking to confirm if I want to >> close my account. >> >> At the bottom of their email is the strapline: >> "Your feedback is helping us build Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company." >> >> It reminds me of Pret A Manger's hypocrisy "We shun the obscure >> chemicals, additives and preservatives common to so much ‘prepared’ >> and ‘fast’ food." (they're owned by McDonalds of course) >> >> dave >> >> On 12 December 2010 10:39, dave miller<[email protected]> wrote: >>> My pathetic response so far has been to close my account with Amazon. >>> I know it's nothing really, but I've had it over 10 years, so I assume >>> I'm a valued customer. I told them why I'm closing it. >>> >>> I hope that by withdrawing myself - and never being a customer again - >>> from those companies who have showed themselves to be political, or at >>> least not neutral, in the Wikileaks shutdown, I can exert some >>> economic pressure. If many people do the same then it should hurt them >>> hard - their valuation is based on numbers of registered members >>> >>> I'm assuming that these companies will respond more to economic >>> pressure than government pressure. I dont know how true this is. >>> >>> There's also - Paypal, visa and Mastercard, I want nothing to do with >>> them, they disgust me. >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11 December 2010 21:00, Simon Biggs<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Thanks Patrick. >>>> >>>> My theory? >>>> >>>> The more central to normalised social activity the internet becomes you >>>> might think the more we should despair. However, it is when the internet >>>> has >>>> become the instrument of social, economic and political exchange that the >>>> "other" finds opportunity to strike. Anon-ops' power is greater now than it >>>> could have been before, simply because the internet has become instrumental >>>> to normality. If one seeks to disrupt normality and posit an alternative >>>> then now is the moment to do it. As they say, it is when it seems the >>>> battle >>>> is lost that victory becomes apparent. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Simon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/12/2010 19:59, "Lichty, Patrick"<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Digital Anarchy and Wikileaks. >>>>> Or, Skynet doesn¹t look anything like we thought it did. >>>>> >>>>> This is the first time I¹ve posted in a while, but I think we¹re in >>>>> significant times. Assange and the whole Wikileaks phenomenon is so >>>>> important >>>>> that it needs a little theory. >>>>> >>>>> To recap for those who have been unaware of the news, Wikileaks is an >>>>> online >>>>> Wikipedia-like database that ³whistle-blows² against >>>>> governmental/corporate >>>>> wrongdoing by releasing controlled/classified documents. As of December >>>>> 2010 >>>>> they have been releasing huge numbers of cables relating to US foreign >>>>> policy, >>>>> which has the First World, especially the US State Department in a panic. >>>>> Why? Because the leaks show the US in any number of gaffes, like calling >>>>> Russia a ³mafia state², disclosing precarious mentions of Middle Eastern >>>>> leaders. In addition, other undisclosed information, such as revealing >>>>> transfers of weapons technology from North Korea to Iran, US drug >>>>> companies >>>>> targeting African politicians, and so on. This disclosure has sent the >>>>> First >>>>> World into diplomatic chaos, with geopolitical politics reconfiguring >>>>> itself >>>>> like a planet-sized Rubik¹s Cube. >>>>> >>>>> First World power has been bitten by its own child, or its own emergent >>>>> system >>>>> as typified in popular science fiction franchises, like the Matrix and >>>>> Terminator. Infopower has begun to become autonomous of its material >>>>> (atomic) >>>>> roots. Instead of the robots, it is merely the infosphere that is >>>>> asserting >>>>> itself. In The Porcelain Workshop, Antonio Negri asserts that one of the >>>>> three major shift into the postmodern is the primacy of >>>>> informatics/cognitive >>>>> capital as central to the new order. As such, it is focusing of society >>>>> on >>>>> this flow of capital which has relocated the foundations of power in the >>>>> new >>>>> millennium. >>>>> >>>>> The Internet was conceived by the US military (DARPA) as a decentralized >>>>> network for the sharing and redundant storage of information in multiple >>>>> locations in case of nuclear attack. In such a case, one node can be >>>>> destroyed, and the network can still function despite their loss. It is >>>>> for >>>>> this reason that I believe that material/conventional power should be >>>>> termed >>>>> as ³atomic², as nuclear weapons are the ultimate extension of the >>>>> nation-state, and as metaphor for material society, we can also double >>>>> that >>>>> this power situates in the world of atoms. However, this extension of >>>>> conventional/²atomic² power has grown into a concurrent, distributed, >>>>> heterogenous field of power that I will call the Infostate, that includes >>>>> the >>>>> Web, E-mail, and all functions of networked communications. Although the >>>>> functionaries of conventional power have restructured themselves in terms >>>>> of >>>>> the informational milieu, the latter is not necessarily congruent with the >>>>> former. The Internet spans most physical states, yet resides in no single >>>>> one. >>>>> >>>>> Despite this, there are zones which the nation state has tried to >>>>> territorialize and limit the flow of cognitive capital, such as Turkey and >>>>> China, but the firewalls remain porous and slippery. This >>>>> deterritiorialization of the Infostate creates an asymmetrical power >>>>> relation >>>>> which, due to its amorphous nature, is problematic for the conventional >>>>> nation-state to engage. Conventional power requires a face upon which to >>>>> focus >>>>> fear and hatred upon, such as Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden. >>>>> Infopower is >>>>> mercuric and morphogenic, and when confronted by the centralized, >>>>> hierarchical >>>>> nature of conventional power, it merely splits, morphs or replicates, >>>>> sidestepping the metaphorical ³army& general². This relationship signals >>>>> the >>>>> new balance of power between the nation-state and the Infostate as >>>>> Krokerian >>>>> Panic dialectic, in which the ability of the one to relate in terms of the >>>>> other implodes. >>>>> >>>>> With the bleeding of information from the material to the infomatic >>>>> rhizome >>>>> through Wikileaks (i.e. the US diplomatic cable leaks), the Infostate has >>>>> created an asymmetrical insurgency against conventional power. Negri¹s >>>>> conception of cognitive capital as locus of power asymmetrically >>>>> challenges >>>>> that of material capital. This is analogous to previous mention of >>>>> events as >>>>> told in the movie, The Matrix, and the artificial (informatic) being >>>>> overriding/supercedes embodied conventional power. As Deleuze, then >>>>> Agamben >>>>> assert that power is the separation of the subject from potentiality, and >>>>> as >>>>> such mitigates dissent, the nation-state is trying to exert power by >>>>> separating the means of support and the figurehead from Wikileaks, but >>>>> distributed, asymmetrical cyberwarfare by the net.community has already >>>>> disrupted banks, credit, and networked sites. It has even awakened the >>>>> amorphous hacker subculture of ³Anonymous² which was last known for its >>>>> mass >>>>> protests against the Church of Scientology to rise against the opponents >>>>> of >>>>> Wikileaks. The Net, as child of the military (conventional power) has >>>>> begun >>>>> to turn on its masters, with expected reflexive responses. >>>>> >>>>> This knee-jerk reaction of the nation-state to asymmetrical power versus >>>>> conventional power became evident in the case of 2001, where decentralized >>>>> ³cellular² physical social networks circumvented centralized power. >>>>> Although >>>>> the previous statement says decentralized physical power, this is merely >>>>> an >>>>> intermediary step to the development of asymmetrical distributed >>>>> infopower. >>>>> The centralized, hierarchical nature of the material corporate >>>>> nation-state >>>>> has been unable to contain the decentralized flow of cellular power, >>>>> which has >>>>> become infopower, created by the emergency of distributed networks. This >>>>> is >>>>> seen as we look again at Matrix Reloaded, where in, as in The Matrix >>>>> Trilogy, >>>>> the informatic body/state (Agent Smith) reacts to the intervention of >>>>> conventional human power (Neo, or ³The One²) by asymmetry in massively >>>>> replicating Wikileaks sites (³The Many²). Conventional power now has a >>>>> cloud >>>>> of moving, replicating targets rather than one to aim at. >>>>> >>>>> The First World then reacts to being challenged by expediting >>>>> material/physical diplomacy that would take months, days, or weeks by >>>>> arresting Assange and possibly for extraditing him to the United States, >>>>> his >>>>> locus of challenge. But although the ³head², (the object of leverage of >>>>> conventional power) is in custody, the ³body² of Wikileaks and the rest >>>>> of its >>>>> ³computational cloud of dissent² stated on December 7th (incidentally, >>>>> the day >>>>> of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor), that it will continue to release >>>>> information through the WikiLeaks network. Like the anthropomorphization >>>>> of >>>>> centralizing identity/placing a single ³face² on challenges to hegemony >>>>> (as in >>>>> the Queens of the movies Aliens and The Borg in Star Trek), the true face >>>>> of >>>>> asymmetry is that of facelessness and morphogenic dissent. It is like >>>>> trying >>>>> to hold mercury, because as the Critical Art Ensemble states, >>>>> decentralized >>>>> dissent can only be addressed through decentralized means, and this is >>>>> not the >>>>> structure of conventional power. >>>>> >>>>> In Electronic Civil Disobedience, The Critical Art Ensemble also states >>>>> that >>>>> in the age of informatic power, physical resistance is severely limited >>>>> in its >>>>> potential for effect, if not useless, as the physical protester is >>>>> corralled >>>>> or elided entirely by authority. The real interventionists, CAE states, >>>>> are >>>>> the 20-something year-old hackers who punch through the firewalls and >>>>> reroute >>>>> flows of information, creating irruptions of redirection, disruption, and >>>>> detournement of infocapital at will. The case of Ricardo Dominguez and >>>>> the >>>>> Electronic Disturbance Theatre¹s virtual sit-in against the University of >>>>> California was a relatively benign case of the disruption of data as >>>>> political >>>>> act. But the intervention in infocapital is explicated on a larger scale >>>>> by >>>>> Chinese governbmental hackers¹ compromise of Google (as revealed by >>>>> Wikileaks), as well as the infiltration of an Iranian reactor by hakers. >>>>> All >>>>> of these illustrate Negri¹s idea that postmodern power/capital has >>>>> shifted to >>>>> that of the informatics and cognitive fields, and signal a primary shift >>>>> of >>>>> the balance power in the First World, if not globally. >>>>> >>>>> In light of this redistribution of power, what would the solution for >>>>> converntional/²atomic² power¹s reassertion of hegemony? This would be to >>>>> contain the rise of informatic power by containing its means of >>>>> distribution. >>>>> This would be by the means of national firewalling, and trunk-line >>>>> disconnection or limited Internet disabling, disrupting infopower, but >>>>> also >>>>> crippling the flow of digitized material capital as well. This is >>>>> problematic >>>>> at best, as conventional power and informatic power are in symbiotic, the >>>>> latter being more nimble and a step ahead of the former, and to attack a >>>>> symbiote always means to cripple its partner as well. The logical result >>>>> of >>>>> such actions would be the elimination of net neutrality (the free and open >>>>> flow of data across the Internet) or even the severance of typologies and >>>>> flows of information across the networks. The symbiotic effect is that >>>>> conventional power/capital is also hobbled, as the physical is dependent >>>>> on >>>>> the same flows of information across the distributed nets, disabling >>>>> itself in >>>>> the process. It is for this reason that it cannot engage in this means of >>>>> retaliation, as it would be the digital suicide of the First World >>>>> nation-state. >>>>> >>>>> This is the brilliance of Wikileaks its use of infrastructure upon which >>>>> conventional power relies as site of anarchic resistance proves the >>>>> potentiality of infomatic power rendering conventional power impotent. In >>>>> this case, bits trump atoms in the milieu of the Net. As nuclear détente >>>>> created an ³aesthetics of uselessness² in the ridiculously high numbers of >>>>> times the world¹s nuclear stockpiles could destroy the Earth, this >>>>> potential >>>>> reduction of the ³atomic/atomic² to aesthetic nullity arises as the >>>>> Infostate >>>>> merely shuts down the control systems of the bunker. I nation of nuclear >>>>> gophers, lifeless in their burrows. >>>>> >>>>> Power is reconfiguring in light of informational vs. conventional power, >>>>> and >>>>> this is why the rise of Wikileaks is significant, and why the geopolitical >>>>> panic-site it creates is a singular event. It suggests that decentralized >>>>> power renders hierarchical conventional power impotent, signaling the >>>>> beginning of the 21st Century paradigm. In The Coming Insurrection, the >>>>> French anarchist group, The Invisible Committee, posits a Communo-Anarchic >>>>> insurgency to overthrow the conventional nation-state. What would >>>>> replace it >>>>> is the creation of a cybernetic proto-industrial model of networked >>>>> communes >>>>> with high tech microproduction that would be established during and after >>>>> a >>>>> mass armed insurrection. The insurrection, as CAE states, will not be >>>>> with >>>>> guns, but with bytes. This is in line with Negri¹s assertion that >>>>> capital in >>>>> the postmodern has shifted to information/cognitive capital, and that >>>>> conventional power merely marginalizes material (atomic) dissent. The >>>>> real >>>>> theatre of engagement is the infosphere, and Wikileaks has realized >>>>> info-insurgency as real power first world/digital society has become >>>>> informatic. Anarchy in its most powerful form is now in the disruption >>>>> and >>>>> release of data withheld by the nation-state. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> >>>> Simon Biggs >>>> [email protected] [email protected] >>>> Skype: simonbiggsuk >>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ >>>> >>>> Research Professor edinburgh college of art >>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/ >>>> Creative Interdisciplinary Research in CoLlaborative Environments >>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ >>>> Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice >>>> http://www.elmcip.net/ >>>> Centre for Film, Performance and Media Arts >>>> http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/film-performance-media-arts >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number >>>> SC009201 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
