Simon, What i am discussing are those points: 1) How can a University use New , and Digital Culture as terms of a unit in the 21st century second decade ? 2) How can a University use the term Latin América for South And central América ? 3) How can a University use a term like Free ??? Software ?
Maybe they are Looking for some kind of students ... I hope they Had learn something with MIT and Schwartz ... Open Source is Still a term to be discussed , but let us accept as it is having in mind that technologies are NOT neutral át. All and that software is just part of a system. Art, Technology and OPEN DATA. From: [email protected] Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:26:48 +0000 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] New Digital Culture Unit @ Goldsmiths Eduardo Open Source is based on a notion of give and take. It's a participatory paradigm. Being able to programme is an important means by which one can participate. However, as James points out, there are other ways. In this respect Open Source is profoundly different to other more traditional IP based models of production and consumption, where the roles of producers and consumers are clearly delineated and ownership of IP fiercely defended. Open Source is, in its best forms, co-creation of the most radical sort. Given that culture is something we create (not something received - although some would like us to believe this) it is possible to argue that Open Source is itself a cultural paradigm based on shared creativity. As for this issue of culture - again, I think we mean different things by this word. The origins of the word are in the domain of agriculture and simply means to improve something through cultivating it. In the 18th and 19th centuries it tended to refer to what we now conceive of as high culture. Since at least the 1940's it has generally be taken to mean any shared set of values, systems or methods associated with a particular group of people who recognise themselves as a member of the group. So, we have sub-cultures. Digital culture was, once upon a time, a sub-culture. Now it is a mainstream culture. With a billion members Facebook alone hosts numerous subcultures within the larger digital paradigm it swims in. A primary component of culture, perhaps the very stuff of highly socialised homosapien culture, is language. Many theorists (Turing, MacLuhan, Winograd, Dennett, Hayles, et al) have suggested that computation is a form of language - not a medium for language but language itself. I find these arguments, to differing degrees, quite compelling. Thus it is possible to regard the relationship of the computer to the processes of culturalisation and socialisation in a similar manner to the role of language. Language could be considered as an open source form of culture (more so in some cultures and language groups than in others - in English there is no governance of the language so it is very open to change through use). Language is socially generative (as a process of reflexive iteration). So is computing. In this sense we can speak of a digital culture. Given all this the programme at Goldsmiths (which is not unique, there are numerous such programmes running internationally) seems to be founded on solid foundations and to be engaging something that is definitely a valid subject and, given the experience of the last decade, particularly timely. I don't see what your problem with it is - unless you wish to critique specific aspects of the programme - such as its scope or focus. But that's of another ilk. best Simon On 14 Feb 2013, at 02:06, Eduardo Valle wrote:James, no it is not, by the fact that If you want to modify not just ask questions on the GUI You must learn programming and even If want to do that You must do in 2 or 3 languages that work on it. So it is Open but not for all át. All. Systems, users and moderators ... > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:28:35 +0000 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] New Digital Culture Unit @ Goldsmiths > > On 14/02/13 Eduardo Valle <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Open for Who ? Only for the ones that wants to learn programming, and > >that is ok but it is not for all át. All. > > what about people who work on the documentation? or those who work on > translations? or those who work on design? or those who spend their > time in the community helping new users (ie forums/mailing > lists/irc/etc)? it is open to all of those people isn't it, or am i > missing something? > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs [email protected] http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk [email protected] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburghhttp://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/ http://designinaction.com/MSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
