Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
People are not black-boxes. We are not simple (or even complex) instances of a class of some kind. OOP's is a very powerful means for creating meaning and action in machines and artificial systems but as a metaphor for human beingness it seems too neat to account for the complexity and multi-valent connectivity that exists between us. We are messy creatures without clear boundaries to individuate us. Our definition is probably less about things (or objects) than dynamic relations as flux. best Simon On 30 Dec 2011, at 12:12, Richard Wright wrote: Things, not Objects - Bruno Latour From: marc garrett marc.garr...@furtherfield.org Date: 29 December 2011 12:08:56 GMT To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Jussi Parikka I can’t claim that I know too much about object oriented philosophy. It’s often more about my friends or colleagues talking about it, enthusiastically for or against. Indeed, I have been one of those who has at best followed some of the arguments but not really dipped too deeply into the debates – which from early on, formed around specific persons, specific arguments, and a specific way of interacting. Hence, let me just be naïve for a second, and think aloud a couple of questions: - I wonder if there is a problem with the notion of object in the sense that it still implies paradoxically quite a correlationist, or lets say, human-centred view to the world; is not the talk of “object” something that summons an image of perceptible, clearly lined, even stable entity – something that to human eyes could be thought of as the normal mode of perception. We see objects in the world. Humans, benches, buses, cats, trashcans, gloves, computers, images, and so forth. But what would a cat, bench, bus, trashcan, or a computer “see”, or sense? more... http://jussiparikka.net/2011/12/21/ooq-object-oriented-questions/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
My unpublished next installment in my long work is called OOD (Object-Oriented Design) and uses some of the work of the Objectivist poets, and some neo baroque embedded devices and ... here, we see the spectre of the posthuman, which has little to do with programming techniques, languages, etc. Just an opinion, Catherine Daly OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Jussi Parikka I can’t claim that I know too much about object oriented philosophy. It’s often more about my friends or colleagues talking about it, enthusiastically for or against. Indeed, I have been one of those who has at best followed some of the arguments but not really dipped too deeply into the debates – which from early on, formed around specific persons, specific arguments, and a specific way of interacting. Hence, let me just be naïve for a second, and think aloud a couple of questions: - I wonder if there is a problem with the notion of object in the sense that it still implies paradoxically quite a correlationist, or lets say, human-centred view to the world; is not the talk of “object” something that summons an image of perceptible, clearly lined, even stable entity – something that to human eyes could be thought of as the normal mode of perception. We see objects in the world. Humans, benches, buses, cats, trashcans, gloves, computers, images, and so forth. But what would a cat, bench, bus, trashcan, or a computer “see”, or sense? more... http://jussiparikka.net/2011/12/21/ooq-object-oriented-questions/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:31:10 + Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk wrote: People are not black-boxes. We are not simple (or even complex) instances of a class of some kind. OOP's is a very powerful means for creating meaning and action in machines and artificial systems but as a metaphor for human beingness it seems too neat to account for the complexity and multi-valent connectivity that exists between us. We are messy creatures without clear boundaries to individuate us. Our definition is probably less about things (or objects) than dynamic relations as flux. best Simon Are you sure we should be thinking in terms of object orientated programming when reading the article? I was too distracted by the confusion as to whether we should or not to read it fully (predicition: my ability to read it will miraculously return as soon as I click send). James. On 30 Dec 2011, at 12:12, Richard Wright wrote: Things, not Objects - Bruno Latour From: marc garrett marc.garr...@furtherfield.org Date: 29 December 2011 12:08:56 GMT To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Jussi Parikka I can’t claim that I know too much about object oriented philosophy. It’s often more about my friends or colleagues talking about it, enthusiastically for or against. Indeed, I have been one of those who has at best followed some of the arguments but not really dipped too deeply into the debates – which from early on, formed around specific persons, specific arguments, and a specific way of interacting. Hence, let me just be naïve for a second, and think aloud a couple of questions: - I wonder if there is a problem with the notion of object in the sense that it still implies paradoxically quite a correlationist, or lets say, human-centred view to the world; is not the talk of “object” something that summons an image of perceptible, clearly lined, even stable entity – something that to human eyes could be thought of as the normal mode of perception. We see objects in the world. Humans, benches, buses, cats, trashcans, gloves, computers, images, and so forth. But what would a cat, bench, bus, trashcan, or a computer “see”, or sense? more... http://jussiparikka.net/2011/12/21/ooq-object-oriented-questions/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
On 30/12/11 12:12, Richard Wright wrote: Things, not Objects - Bruno Latour As we all know, there are many more things that don't exist than things that do. - Ken Campbell. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ - Object-Oriented-Questions.
...''WHAT'S WITHOUT NAME, THAT DOESN'T EXIST...BUT EVERYTHING'S NAMED''(V.Nabokov).../which mean it's our fault AND RESPONSIBILITY/...MANIK...DECEMBER...2011... - Original Message - From: Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org To: netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 3:15 PM Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ - Object-Oriented-Questions. On 30/12/11 12:12, Richard Wright wrote: Things, not Objects - Bruno Latour As we all know, there are many more things that don't exist than things that do. - Ken Campbell. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
hello, yep, not sure OOP¨has something to do with OOP cite Graham Harman “Object-Oriented Philosophy” This term is my own coinage, dating to 1999. (If anyone used the phrase earlier than that, I was unaware of it but would be happy to credit it if it is brought to my attention.) (...) In short, object-oriented philosophy involves a fairly general set of minimal standards that leaves a good bit of room for personal variation. You can agree with Whitehead rather than me and still be an object-oriented philosopher. My own version has not just one, but two basic principles: 1. Individual entities of various different scales (not just tiny quarks and electrons) are the ultimate stuff of the cosmos. 2. These entities are never exhausted by any of their relations or even by their sum of all possible relations. Objects withdraw from relation. /cite http://doctorzamalek2.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/brief-srooo-tutorial/ Le 30/12/2011 13:31, Simon Biggs a écrit : People are not black-boxes. We are not simple (or even complex) instances of a class of some kind. OOP's is a very powerful means for creating meaning and action in machines and artificial systems but as a metaphor for human beingness it seems too neat to account for the complexity and multi-valent connectivity that exists between us. We are messy creatures without clear boundaries to individuate us. Our definition is probably less about things (or objects) than dynamic relations as flux. best Simon On 30 Dec 2011, at 12:12, Richard Wright wrote: Things, not Objects - Bruno Latour From: marc garrettmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org Date: 29 December 2011 12:08:56 GMT To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativitynetbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativitynetbehaviour@netbehaviour.org OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions. Jussi Parikka I can’t claim that I know too much about object oriented philosophy. It’s often more about my friends or colleagues talking about it, enthusiastically for or against. Indeed, I have been one of those who has at best followed some of the arguments but not really dipped too deeply into the debates – which from early on, formed around specific persons, specific arguments, and a specific way of interacting. Hence, let me just be naïve for a second, and think aloud a couple of questions: - I wonder if there is a problem with the notion of object in the sense that it still implies paradoxically quite a correlationist, or lets say, human-centred view to the world; is not the talk of “object” something that summons an image of perceptible, clearly lined, even stable entity – something that to human eyes could be thought of as the normal mode of perception. We see objects in the world. Humans, benches, buses, cats, trashcans, gloves, computers, images, and so forth. But what would a cat, bench, bus, trashcan, or a computer “see”, or sense? more... http://jussiparikka.net/2011/12/21/ooq-object-oriented-questions/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
On 30/12/11 17:10, Simon Biggs wrote: The programming dimension seems to be at the heart of the argument. There are various different versions of OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming In particular, multimethod-based OOP doesn't require that objects own or contain the actions that can be performed upon them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimethod And there are more modern programming paradigms than OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_paradigms OOP is certainly still current in programming, but there are other programming paradigms that mesh better with the philosophy of mathematics at least. - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ - Object-Oriented-Questions.
On 30/12/11 14:25, manik wrote: ...''WHAT'S WITHOUT NAME, THAT DOESN'T EXIST...BUT EVERYTHING'S NAMED''(V.Nabokov).../which mean it's our fault AND RESPONSIBILITY/...MANIK...DECEMBER...2011... Ontology + Deontology... - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
very confusing... about the relation (or not) between Object Oriented Philosophy Object Oriented Programming http://www.bogost.com/blog/objectoriented_p.shtml Le 30/12/2011 18:50, Rob Myers a écrit : On 30/12/11 17:10, Simon Biggs wrote: The programming dimension seems to be at the heart of the argument. There are various different versions of OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming In particular, multimethod-based OOP doesn't require that objects own or contain the actions that can be performed upon them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimethod And there are more modern programming paradigms than OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_paradigms OOP is certainly still current in programming, but there are other programming paradigms that mesh better with the philosophy of mathematics at least. - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
There is no question in my mind that object oriented philosophy is borne from and related to notions of object oriented programming. If we accept that, then it's interesting to see yet another way in which computer programming and code-concepts are permeating our contemporary culture. However, I'm not quite sure I see the point. It looks like they're essentially taking age-old philosophical concepts and considerations and putting them in a new wrapper. If nothing else then perhaps it will make it easier for programmers to understand some philosophical concepts. On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Yann Le Guennec i...@x-arn.org wrote: very confusing... about the relation (or not) between Object Oriented Philosophy Object Oriented Programming http://www.bogost.com/blog/objectoriented_p.shtml Le 30/12/2011 18:50, Rob Myers a écrit : On 30/12/11 17:10, Simon Biggs wrote: The programming dimension seems to be at the heart of the argument. There are various different versions of OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming In particular, multimethod-based OOP doesn't require that objects own or contain the actions that can be performed upon them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimethod And there are more modern programming paradigms than OOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_paradigms OOP is certainly still current in programming, but there are other programming paradigms that mesh better with the philosophy of mathematics at least. - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
What should object oriented philosophy be about in an age where the
paradigmatic divide between object and subject is a long past station?
To me it appears to be a rather 'subjective' way to connect a 'popular' issue
i.e. programming practices with a vague notion of 'philosophy' and should not
be taken too seriously
Same goes for OOP as the 'only just' way to formalize current programming
techniques as it is just a way among others to 'look' at a certain field of
theoretical approaches to practical problems i.e. optimizing code, for we have
had before 'lineair coding', heuristic coding(spaghetti) and other 'schools' of
best practise
During my training as software engineer early 90ties different -commercialized
and evangelized -methods were accentuated (RUP, Agile a.o.) wheras during my
mathematics and informatics studies - late 70ties, beginning 80ties - more
accent was given to 'result driven' approaches such as assembler/compiler
techniques
Comparing these two, give rise to suspect that whatever is 'a la mode' gets the
most attention and followers, complete with a course/certification industry to
serve the corporate trendy attitude
I never figured out althought on what premisses these paradigma shift were
grounded apart for the gain in 'time to market' and not in anyway based on
scientifically based decisions
BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and php):
http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/
(FB login required)
and have a look at the simple straightforward code, with a nice example of
using recursion in js -
function vote(obj){
...
setTimeout(vote(obj), 200), raises/lowers the percentages automatically
...
}
whereas with the following simple php code snippet the program is able to track
the ip nr's and eventually corresponding domains from every visitor/user:
fwrite($file,$REMOTE_ADDR)
Currently I am working to gather all the public available information about
users/visitors to be logged using the 'Open Graph API' from FB, which by the
way is heavily structured around a object oriented coding 'view'
In the making: a same kind of simple program to mess with the Dow
Jones/Euronext indices, just for the fun of subverting extremely influential
figures
Andreas Maria Jacobs
w: http://www.nictoglobe.com
w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl
On Dec 30, 2011, at 19:23, Pall Thayer pallt...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no question in my mind that object oriented philosophy is
borne from and related to notions of object oriented programming. If
we accept that, then it's interesting to see yet another way in which
computer programming and code-concepts are permeating our contemporary
culture. However, I'm not quite sure I see the point. It looks like
they're essentially taking age-old philosophical concepts and
considerations and putting them in a new wrapper. If nothing else then
perhaps it will make it easier for programmers to understand some
philosophical concepts.
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Yann Le Guennec i...@x-arn.org wrote:
very confusing...
about the relation (or not) between Object Oriented Philosophy Object
Oriented Programming
http://www.bogost.com/blog/objectoriented_p.shtml
Le 30/12/2011 18:50, Rob Myers a écrit :
On 30/12/11 17:10, Simon Biggs wrote:
The programming dimension seems to be at the heart of the argument.
There are various different versions of OOP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
In particular, multimethod-based OOP doesn't require that objects own or
contain the actions that can be performed upon them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimethod
And there are more modern programming paradigms than OOP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_paradigms
OOP is certainly still current in programming, but there are other
programming paradigms that mesh better with the philosophy of
mathematics at least.
- Rob.
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
--
*
Pall Thayer
artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
*
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Sent from my eXtended BodY
On 30 dec. 2011, at 19:23, Pall Thayer pallt...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no question in my mind that object oriented philosophy is
borne from and related to notions of object oriented programming. If
we accept that, then it's interesting to see yet another way in which
computer programming and code-concepts are permeating our contemporary
culture. However, I'm not quite sure I see the point. It
Re: [NetBehaviour] fb bashing app [was: Object-Oriented-Questions]
Hi Andreas,
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:52:34 +0100
IR3ABF aj...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Same goes for OOP as the 'only just' way to formalize current
programming techniques as it is just a way among others to 'look' at
a certain field of theoretical approaches to practical problems i.e.
optimizing code, for we have had before 'lineair coding', heuristic
coding(spaghetti) and other 'schools' of best practise
As well as actually being very useful at times, stackoverflow.com also
shows imo lots of indoctrination.
BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and
php):
http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/
(FB login required)
I'm really hesitant to try fb apps, I have a distrust of them... and
the ones I've seen are really just excuses for inflicting more
marketing shite at me...
Btw, what does your fb app do? If I knew perhaps I'd be more inclined
to make an exception to my zero-tolerance of fb-apps policy :-)
James.
and have a look at the simple straightforward code, with a nice
example of using recursion in js -
function vote(obj){
...
setTimeout(vote(obj), 200), raises/lowers the percentages
automatically ...
}
whereas with the following simple php code snippet the program is
able to track the ip nr's and eventually corresponding domains from
every visitor/user:
fwrite($file,$REMOTE_ADDR)
Currently I am working to gather all the public available information
about users/visitors to be logged using the 'Open Graph API' from FB,
which by the way is heavily structured around a object oriented
coding 'view'
In the making: a same kind of simple program to mess with the Dow
Jones/Euronext indices, just for the fun of subverting extremely
influential figures
Andreas Maria Jacobs
w: http://www.nictoglobe.com
w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl
--
http://jwm-art.net/
image/audio/text/code/
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] fb bashing app [was: Object-Oriented-Questions]
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:05:41 + James Morris ja...@jwm-art.net wrote: BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and php): http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/ (FB login required) I'm really hesitant to try fb apps, I have a distrust of them... and the ones I've seen are really just excuses for inflicting more marketing shite at me... Btw, what does your fb app do? If I knew perhaps I'd be more inclined to make an exception to my zero-tolerance of fb-apps policy :-) Besides which Firefox also says: This Connection is Untrusted You have asked Firefox to connect securely to nictoglobe.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. blah blah blah. What Should I Do? James. Andreas Maria Jacobs w: http://www.nictoglobe.com w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
[NetBehaviour] Why is Google reporting my most common keyword is viagra or cialis?
http://redleg-redleg.blogspot.com/2011/02/pharmacy-hack.html -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
[NetBehaviour] Psychogeodata 2/3
Image: http://robmyers.org/2011/12/30/derive_sem_example.png Blog post including links: http://robmyers.org/2011/12/30/psychogeodata-23/ Geodata represents maps as graphs of nodes joined by edges (...as points joined by lines). This is a convenient representation for processing by computer software. Other data can be represented in this way, including words and their relationships. We can map the names of streets into the semantic graph of WordNet using NLTK. We can then establish how similar words are by searching the semantic graph to find how far apart they are. This semantic distance can be used instead of geographic distance when deciding which nodes to choose when pathfinding. Mapping between these two spaces (or two graphs) is a conceptual mapping, and searching lexicographic space using hypernyms allows abstraction and conceptual slippage to be introduced into what would otherwise be simple pathfinding. This defamiliarizes and conceptually enriches the constructed landscape, two key elements of Psychogeography. The example above was created by the script derive_sem, which creates random walks between semantically related nodes. It's easy to see the relationship between the streets it has chosen. You can see the html version of the generated file here, and the script is included with the Psychogeodata project at https://gitorious.org/robmyers/psychogeodata . (Part one of this series can be found here, part three will cover potential future directions for Psychogeodata.) ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] fb bashing app [was: Object-Oriented-Questions]
Hi James You should accept the 'security exception', it is merely that the domain nictoglobe.com does not issues 'trusted certificates' as is necessary for a proper https connection You also can try to connect 'insecure' to: http://nictoglobe.com/canvas/index.php to avoid the hassle, bypassing both FB and https! Actually the program does nothing special, it displays several silly alert windows, stating your stupidity versus FB's whether you go up or down Just give it a try, it does not harm and you can always check the code beforehand( view page source in FF) Best Andreas Maria Jacobs w: http://www.nictoglobe.com w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl On Dec 30, 2011, at 22:08, James Morris ja...@jwm-art.net wrote: On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:05:41 + James Morris ja...@jwm-art.net wrote: BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and php): http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/ (FB login required) I'm really hesitant to try fb apps, I have a distrust of them... and the ones I've seen are really just excuses for inflicting more marketing shite at me... Btw, what does your fb app do? If I knew perhaps I'd be more inclined to make an exception to my zero-tolerance of fb-apps policy :-) Besides which Firefox also says: This Connection is Untrusted You have asked Firefox to connect securely to nictoglobe.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. blah blah blah. What Should I Do? James. Andreas Maria Jacobs w: http://www.nictoglobe.com w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] OOQ – Object-Oriented-Questions.
I agree with some of your points, andreas. I do think that latching on to
terminology that is en vogue may be a factor but then again, isn't that
often what sparks new ways of looking at things? Taking ideas from one
field and exploring how they might apply to another? I'm not going to
criticize the use of an oop approach to philosophy. I think its a very
valid consideration within the context of the contemporary. Its intriguing
but in all honesty, I'm not convinced that it will amount to much. As I
said, isn't it just a repackaging of old arguments? Aren't we still faced
with the question of how we define a shoe if I decide to use it to open a
bottle of wine? In ooprogramming, objects are very clearly defined. They
will absolutely not allow methods that haven't been assigned to them. When
applied to philosophy, it sounds a bit like a return to constructivism, no?
And if they try to say that their use of object oriented is entirely
different, then we have to ask, well, then why did you use that term if
you didn't want the two to be compared? But who knows where it may lead if
we don't explore it?
On Dec 30, 2011 3:53 PM, IR3ABF aj...@xs4all.nl wrote:
What should object oriented philosophy be about in an age where the
paradigmatic divide between object and subject is a long past station?
To me it appears to be a rather 'subjective' way to connect a 'popular'
issue i.e. programming practices with a vague notion of 'philosophy' and
should not be taken too seriously
Same goes for OOP as the 'only just' way to formalize current programming
techniques as it is just a way among others to 'look' at a certain field of
theoretical approaches to practical problems i.e. optimizing code, for we
have had before 'lineair coding', heuristic coding(spaghetti) and other
'schools' of best practise
During my training as software engineer early 90ties different
-commercialized and evangelized -methods were accentuated (RUP, Agile a.o.)
wheras during my mathematics and informatics studies - late 70ties,
beginning 80ties - more accent was given to 'result driven' approaches such
as assembler/compiler techniques
Comparing these two, give rise to suspect that whatever is 'a la mode'
gets the most attention and followers, complete with a course/certification
industry to serve the corporate trendy attitude
I never figured out althought on what premisses these paradigma shift were
grounded apart for the gain in 'time to market' and not in anyway based on
scientifically based decisions
BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and php):
http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/
(FB login required)
and have a look at the simple straightforward code, with a nice example of
using recursion in js -
function vote(obj){
...
setTimeout(vote(obj), 200), raises/lowers the percentages automatically
...
}
whereas with the following simple php code snippet the program is able to
track the ip nr's and eventually corresponding domains from every
visitor/user:
fwrite($file,$REMOTE_ADDR)
Currently I am working to gather all the public available information
about users/visitors to be logged using the 'Open Graph API' from FB, which
by the way is heavily structured around a object oriented coding 'view'
In the making: a same kind of simple program to mess with the Dow
Jones/Euronext indices, just for the fun of subverting extremely
influential figures
Andreas Maria Jacobs
w: http://www.nictoglobe.com/http://www.nictoglobe.com
w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl/http://burgerwaanzin.nl
On Dec 30, 2011, at 19:23, Pall Thayer pallt...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no question in my mind that object oriented philosophy is
borne from and related to notions of object oriented programming. If
we accept that, then it's interesting to see yet another way in which
computer programming and code-concepts are permeating our contemporary
culture. However, I'm not quite sure I see the point. It looks like
they're essentially taking age-old philosophical concepts and
considerations and putting them in a new wrapper. If nothing else then
perhaps it will make it easier for programmers to understand some
philosophical concepts.
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Yann Le Guennec i...@x-arn.org wrote:
very confusing...
about the relation (or not) between Object Oriented Philosophy Object
Oriented Programming
http://www.bogost.com/blog/objectoriented_p.shtml
Le 30/12/2011 18:50, Rob Myers a écrit :
On 30/12/11 17:10, Simon Biggs wrote:
The programming dimension seems to be at the heart of the argument.
There are various different versions of OOP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
In particular, multimethod-based OOP doesn't require that objects own or
contain the actions that can be performed upon them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimethod
And there are more modern programming paradigms than OOP:
Re: [NetBehaviour] fb bashing app [was: Object-Oriented-Questions]
Hi Pall, James, Yann ( et al) I just read some definitions of de-obfuscating code, and suddenly recognised that I am a very naive coder! -;) But nevertheless still enjoying doing it, maybe because all that cryptic secret stuff is something not directly connected to coding 'an sich' but has more to do with protecting source/code in an environment where maliciousness is an apparently dominant practice The 'evil doers' - spam, cialis, viagra etc - you pointed to in your link are more or less negative creatives, whereas I and - I think - a lot of others are just 'creatives'. Then I wonder if a felt - or lived - 'naivity' will not - in the long term - survive as a 'positive' force contrary to the 'negative' forces of the 'spam' politics of 'the war on terror', built on a 'negative' and de/fensive philosophy, resulting in ... well obfuscating even our 'lived' environment, examplified by borders, fences, certificates, examination and more 'artificial' coded social and relational 'programs' To critisize these phenomena one needs to able to both code and de/code these constructs and therefore step outside that same positive 'naivity'. So to recap the comparision between OOPh and OOP can give insights in terrains not being connected at first sight, but when put in a broader context have more in common than we maybe want them to have, the 'contemporary' is yet so obfuscated that is a necessity to de/obfuscate it in a way directly connected to our societal 'existence' , which makes it a 'philosophical' issue par excellence! Andreas Sent from my eXtended BodY On 30 dec. 2011, at 22:08, James Morris ja...@jwm-art.net wrote: On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:05:41 + James Morris ja...@jwm-art.net wrote: BTW have a look at my 'new' FB bashing program (written in js and php): http://apps.facebook.com/whathef-/ (FB login required) I'm really hesitant to try fb apps, I have a distrust of them... and the ones I've seen are really just excuses for inflicting more marketing shite at me... Btw, what does your fb app do? If I knew perhaps I'd be more inclined to make an exception to my zero-tolerance of fb-apps policy :-) Besides which Firefox also says: This Connection is Untrusted You have asked Firefox to connect securely to nictoglobe.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. blah blah blah. What Should I Do? James. Andreas Maria Jacobs w: http://www.nictoglobe.com w: http://burgerwaanzin.nl -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
[NetBehaviour] puckered mouth either or
puckered mouth either or http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks.mp4 http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks1.png http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks2.png http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks3.png http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks4.png http://www.alansondheim.org/vocks5.png either this and just I happened was and thrown I out was of thrown the out game-space, of this the just game-space, happened into the game, it what was it life, game game, life, was who was playing, dojoji alan twine, dojoji what julu who twine, was moaning and singing and warning the trembling, it vision, acute, clear dark acute, what dark vision, dusty thrown I, of game-space and song, was around singing playing was blurry the obscure, was light so obdurate, clean, so it clean, light space, it being game this one happened, playing, no and one it speaking saying, saying, and inviting trembling, where in in in not song, my puckered lips like puckered a like broken a womb, broken bearing, womb, the bearing, game-space, born, lips gathered a mouth, shorn, hearing, born, shorn, my blurry, it played, dusty played or this just happened and I was thrown out of the game-space, into the game, what was the game, it was the game of life, who was playing, it was alan dojoji and julu twine, what was the game, it was moaning and singing and warning and trembling, what was the vision, it was clear and acute, it was dark and dusty and I, I was thrown out of the game-space and into the game, and what was the game, it was the game of song, and who was singing the song, it was the game-space, the game-space was singing the song, into the game, into and around the game, and the game was playing the game, it was blurry and obscure, it was light and obdurate, and it was so so clean, and it was I, I was thrown into the game space, and out of the game, it was the game of being the game, and the game was being the game, and this just happened, no one was playing, and it was speaking and saying, inviting and trembling, and what was the song, where was the song, it was in the game, it was not in the game-space, my lips puckered like a broken womb, bearing, born, my lips gathered like a broken mouth, hearing, shorn, and it was dusty and obdurate, so clean, so blurry, so played, so played out ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
