Hi -

"what it does when it does what it's supposed to do" :)

indeed, that's just about it.

i mean, an open semantic form, would be, given the loop in your statement,
where 'meaning' comes in, biting its tail.
is meaning a loop? or is it open? is it a warm chewing away the dirt around
itself? what about the gestures of the creature, do they have any meaning?
alphabetic language might be likened to military commands, pitched rational
and effective, building or destroying empires.
beneath that are gestures, body, domains without handles, all kinds of,
call them languages, since we're biological and anything we do is language
as opposed to say random quantum events. it would be really hard for us to
do something 'random' which wouldn't link up to our specific phenomenology.
this, only to say that an 'open semantic form' is just a looser form of
meaning-production, deliberately avoiding the ... and try establishing a
poetical - the word - notion of ... not that 'poetical' is at stake, but
how would a feral child communicate, given its history? can we imagine
other types of languages, less formal,more intuitive than sign and glyph.
so there's asemic writing, for humans, or for cats and dogs. enter the
ouroboros, when does it have meaning, when does the semantic form bite its
tail? to be sure, we do not know even that it's a language. does it
decode?does it have to decode? ah, much we want to decode... the
mysteries...if only to stage them again as theater, doubled form and double
negation. the 'O' stands untouched.  i'm writing in your hand instead.

the use i imagined of the asemic chat is like this chat log
http://noemata.net/chatasemic/chat/1426628136.html
where several humans, or reloads of, are chatting, with a bot on the side.

but you see there are others like this
http://noemata.net/chatasemic/chat/1426706990.html
where one part is mute, only the bot is gesturing wildly, so we can imagine
the human is actively imagining what it's saying.

then i like this one also
http://noemata.net/chatasemic/chat/1426624996.html
which is a reframing of language+

i don't know if this answered your question.i thoughtof a primitive
gestural communication, somehow in an absurd chat-form,questioning language
and what we do with it. how could it not be social? keeping it simple (and
stupid), there's some reflective space there, the context is already full,
we arefull, so often we don't need much to catalyst. lot of text is used to
prop up holes in the wall ... anyway, at some level there's a bridge
between language and art, or state your own river.


thanks for response, appreciated

bjørn


On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 8:34 PM, ruth catlow <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  Thanks for posting : )
>
> It does something on Firefox for linux - I type, it scrawls (rather
> charmingly, like a human who doesn't care that I can't read its
> handwriting).
>
> but what it does, doesn't tell me what "A wordless open semantic form of
> social interaction between humans and bot"
> what do the words 'semantic' and 'social' mean.
>
> please could you say more about what it does when it does what it's
> supposed to do?
>
> cheers
> Ruth
>
>
>  On 17/03/15 18:47, Bjørn Magnhildøen wrote:
>
> i get some response it's not working on mac, not sure if safari has
> complete html5 canvas drawing support... haven't cross-checked on
> browsers.... still, empty dialogues create visuals...
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I played with this online after seeing it on Google+ - it's amazing and
>> graphically really interesting!
>>
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2015, Bj?rn Magnhild?en wrote:
>>
>>  A wordless open semantic form of social interaction between humans and
>>> bot
>>> http://noemata.net/chatasemic/
>>>
>>>  [human_bot.png]
>>> human + bot
>>>
>>> [3humans_bot.png]
>>> 3 humans + bot
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ==
>> email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
>> web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285
>> music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/
>> current text http://www.alansondheim.org/tc.txt
>> ==
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing 
> [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

Reply via email to