@Ruth I welcome you & everyone to come up with your own version / remix /
interpretation of how you view yourself (or not) as a #netartizen. That was
the initial question that prompted this discussion and I hope it evolves and
become more and more nuanced through our discourse!
If I were to to say that I was never knowingly cynical would you put me into
a new category of Denier?
On 07/03/15 14:33, Randall Packer wrote:
>
>
> What an extraordinary chorus of voices we have here on the NetBehaviours List!
> As a composer, I am interested in how all the parts harmonize together
> polyphonically, rub up against each other contrapuntally, provide a sense of
> direction and perspective as the lines & melodies of our utterances
> collectively play out.
>
>
>
>
> So here is a first pass at some categorical distinctions to provide us with a
> ³social taxonomy² of net behaviourism: (I welcome all revisions & additions!)
>
>
>
>
> Enjoy, Randall
>
>
>
>
> The Alarmists
>
>
>
> @BishopZ >>>>> The Internet of Things will inevitably consolidate corporate
> power over our personal liberty.
>
> @Alan >>>> The digital, I think, is unbearably fragile; not only is privacy
> lost, but we are not prepared, and can't prepare, for the attacks and
> corrosion to come.
>
> @Patrick >>>> I see a more profound short-term sense of (pessimism) in the
> youth in my regions of interaction.
>
> @Dave >>>> The new breed of technologies might make it more obvious that
> government is entirely obsolete.
>
> @Rob >>>>>>> The Cultural Smog Of The Internet a paralysing weight rather
> than an inspiring force.
>
> @Mez >>>>> Whatever the magnitude/form, online dialogues appear to be flooded
> with antagonistic commentary.
>
>
>
>
> The Cynics
>
> @Alan >>>>> Do you honestly believe, with all the
> hacking/corrosion/cyberwarfare going on, that regulations will make the
> slightest bit of difference?
>
> @Edward >>>> But don't hope for too much. They guys with the money hold all
> the good cards.
>
> @Isabel >>>>> It's worth being an artist for all sorts of reasons, but not
> particularly for social change.
>
> @Simon >>>> jumping on the digital bandwagon seems pointless.
>
> @Karl >>>> there is a word for actor and audience in the social media realm:
> prosumer!
>
> @Ruth >>>>> From the perspective of the platform providers, the purpose of the
> users actions and interactions is to squirt lucrative data.
>
> @James >>>> the lines (of communication) are already open, we're just sending
> information back and forth along them
>
>
>
>
> The Realists
>
> @Ruth >>>> Netartizen #tip3 Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook,
> Tumblr are not public
>
> @Johannes >>>>>>>>> "(I) find the idea of artizen nation objectionable.
>
> @Paul >>>> We all think we're creating important and relevant work but if the
> future doesn't come up with a way to extract and preserve it, then it probably
> didn't mean that much to them.
>
> @Marc >>>> What future artists need to know is that they can make their own
> contexts beyond the given structures, shoved down their metaphorical gullets
>
> @Edward >>>> I'm not sure I feel like a citizen of the net.
>
> @Isabel >>>> there may be some degree of privilege involved in the possibility
> of being/contributing as a Netartizen/Netartisan.
>
>
>
>
> The Apocalyptic
>
> @Kath >>>> if there is some pulse in the future which wipes all the
> technology we'll be left with a gap from our digital/online years. let's hope
> the libraries survive.
>
> @Patrick >>>>> I feel that social media and the rise of infopower like the
> Arab Spring and ISIS, big data, stacks and Baynesian algorithms typify our
> time.
>
> @Alan >>>> Who will be physical when the land is scorched? And perhaps more to
> the point, what are we, as NetArtizens doing/writing/ about it?
>
>
>
>
> The Hopeful
>
> @David >>>> Perhaps acting out of ignorance (is) an opportunity to create
> something that is truly new.
>
> @Rob >>>> Claiming privatised (network) space for the public that is
> (supposedly economically) exploited to give it its value, and doing so under
> the banner of art, is a political strategy (for those of us who like political
> strategies) that has the potential to wrong-foot affective capital's
> enclosures.
>
> @Rob >>> Let's make a net we want to be citizens of, for a while.
>
> @Helen >>>> I have long hunted for a good word for this - for audiences that
> are participating in a really creative way in a work - & i don't just mean the
> "interactivity" of pressing a button or something like that. i mean
> co-authoring in a way that they can insert their own creativity &
> alter/influence the work.
>
> @Randall >>> The modern day database, content management system, and social
> media offer new ways to fully integrate the artistic process into a
> dynamically-shared, distributed network.
>
> @Ruth >>>> NetArtizen #tip1: initiate and participate in equal measure.
>
>
>
>
> The Poets
>
> @Bill >>>> would be nice to have MANIC responses
>
> @Ruth >>>> NetArtizen #tip2 There is no one We
>
> @Mez >>>>> N.Et.A[l]rtizen #[s]tip[ewe.lation]3:
> S[m]o[dalities+fun]c[t]i[ons_]al[ways]media[ate]platform[at]s.
>
> @Alan >>>>> cultural heritage =
> 0000000067141066147020145071157060440063556066145063040
>
> @Dark >>>> 404 FILE NOT FOUND I am still alive
>
>
>
>
> The Dreamers
>
> @Gil >>>>> I find out more about the world we live in from netbehaviour than
> from anywhere else.
>
> @Randall >>> Let¹s conceptualize an approach to networked systems that can be
> expressed with any social media platform we may invent or even dream of.
>
> @BishopZ >>>> I had a dream one time of teams of artists paratrooping into
> troubled areas - delivering theatrical re-interpretations of local mythology -
> explaining in local vernacular the torment that locals faced.
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
