my response was to your
>.. In general, living systems
>process more information than non-living systems, with the possible
>exception of computers which have greater information processing

and your
>A machine .. carries information (as order).
seems to echo the confusion. the information is only information to other
than the machine. otherwise we would be limited to saying yes. i'm
disappointed enough by the californian flu of agreement not to need it
amplified by my tools.

On 23 January 2013 04:42, John Hopkins <> wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from John Hopkins <> -----
> From: John Hopkins <>
> Reply-To:
> Subject: Re: <nettime> living systems theory
> Organization: neoscenes
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:20:03 -0700
> To: list nettime <>
> On 1/22/13 07:18, chris mann wrote:
> >please, once again, computers process data. not information. they have no
> >idea about what theyre doing or why, so it can only be data. computers
> have
> >no motivation, no conspiracy, no horizon. therefore no possibility of
> >dealing with information.
> As an organized and indivisible expression of a wholistic and continuous
> living system (ours!), through their operation, or even merely their
> maintained presence, they are increasing local entropy, and in that sense
> they are carrying information into the future as long as they are more
> organized than their surroundings. We are not separate from the wider
> system that we are immersed within. If we were, why worry about systemic
> degradations of the ecosystem...? Why worry about consuming energy?

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact:

Reply via email to