[NetBehaviour] On and for Chris Kraus, After Kathy Acker, Semiotext(e), 2017

[Alan Sondheim]

On and for Chris Kraus, After Kathy Acker, Semiotext(e), 2017

https://www.amazon.com/After-Kathy-Semiotext-Active-Agents/dp/1635900069

(or any other less monopolistic site)

1. I've just finished reading After Kathy Acker; consider this a
review by a problematic and early participant in Kathy's Life. I
knew her for the short time before and after we made the Blue
Tape (and another tape, now lost); we continued to speak on the
3am 4am phone after that, when everyone else seemed asleep, a
world of intensity and energy without the noise and too bright
lights. At least at that point. I'm hazy on the dates here.

1a. New York was energy.

2. After Kathy Acker tunnels through one of the most complex
lives you might encounter; it's thick with reminiscence as well
as selections from her notebooks, letters, novels, essays,
remembered conversations. What strikes me most is how "true" the
book is, (if one can say that); I have a deconstructive turn,
but the narrative and description brings so much to mind,
foregrounds so much that I lived through in other contexts
(Acconci for example) that I find myself literally overwhelmed,
returned to the 1970s downtown that I knew. The Blue Tape hadn't
been shown in years; Tony Conrad transferred it to digital (I
never received the original back); and now that haunts me as
well by way of Kraus' text - the grit or dirt for example that
Anna Maria Pinaka speaks of is re/presented (and without
accompanying photographs of Kathy, everything swirls through and
around the text.)

2a. (I almost didn't make it through that period by the way.)

3. The book is analogic, in spite of Kathy's later use of
digital media; what occurred happened in a real time of phone
calls, mail, personal encounters, at best an answering machine.
But - and this is really important, I think - it's all about
networking, interconnections, coagulations, dissipations,
strange attractors (in both senses of the phrase); it's hardly
modernism with modernism's clean and proper body, modernism's
white room - instead there's a sense of abrasion, dust, sex,
dirtiness, tenderness through it - and above all a sense of an
obdurate Kathy, someone unconfined (except by herself), someone
moving through spaces (I think of WAN, wide-area-networking) -

3a. It's as if things _spread,_ presaging the digital, an
electric-electronic writing born around the time of the Net,
taking a different route.

4. And it's this that makes the book essential now - an account
opening up a literature that problematizes theorizing,
problematizes the body, style, the sentence, the ground, subtext
or superstructure. It's necessary that categories, walls, come
down now - that we might discover there are other paths through
sememes already inundated by corporate hubris - other paths in
fact which, through the somatic, bypass those sememes
altogether. The result might be writing which falters, which
teeters on the brink of failure, which infinitely expands, feels
trivial, feels like the most important writing in the world. And
Chris Kraus details all of this absolutely brilliantly; the book
- and just as importantly, Kathy's writings - all this should be
on our shelves, now, in the midst of incipient tyranny and the
desecration of what used to be thought of as American democracy.
Kathy's work isn't outdated; if anything, it's revolutionary and
timely, as is After Kathy Acker; check them out.

___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

[NetBehaviour] the leading developer in providence, presentation of new projects

[Alan Sondheim]

the leading developer in providence, presentation of new projects

http://www.alansondheim.org/thepitch.png
http://www.alansondheim.org/thepitch.mp4

antonioni always comes to mind. the projects involve hotels,
residences, remodeling. subsidized lower- or middle-income
housing apparently isn't necessary in providence.

the images resonate in so many ways, neoliberalism as well.

what was presented wasn't really a pitch, so much as a
presentation of development beginning shortly.

thanks to the downtown neighborhood association which hosted
the get-together.

" >
Zopissa, zopissa, the pitch and tar which is scraped from old
ships after another; somewhere deep within the pitch-black
splendor viral full force of it is like quick-start MUD
commands, raised to the pitch of a meter which would be audible.
In some cases I chose to raise the pitch, proof this is the
sound buildings make when you raise the pitch a little, raise
the pitch on the right. Think of the left-hand side as a string
pressure sharpens the pitch, there are a-harmonics and
an-harmonics that illuminate - and comforts not the darkest
night. the second pass quickly by stretching them 300%. The
music is fascinating; I'm wondering if this startling choral
outburst emerges out of the pitch dark...
< "

___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] I hate blockchain plantoids by O’Khaos - that's probably why they are great

[Annie Abrahams]

hi Antye, it wasn't, but it is now (quick post)
https://aabrahams.wordpress.com/2017/09/26/understanding-block-chain/

hugs to you
Annie

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:36 PM, AG Forever  wrote:

> annie is this letter somewhere online ?
> i have a few blockchain folllowers on twitter like to send them
>
> hugs
>
> sound & curation
> AGF: @poemproducer / .com
> sound wave : antyegreie.com
>
>
>
> On 25 Sep 2017, at 19:07, Annie Abrahams  wrote:
>
> This email is there to try to pen down some of my very visceral negative
> reactions to *Plantoid - The Birth of a Blockchain-Based Lifeform* (p 51
> -61)in *Artists Re:thinking the Blockchain* https://
> liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/products/100826
> 
>
> Let me first say that Plantoid is a great project, because it makes some
> implications of the Blockchain technology very evident and poses a lot of
> questions.
>
> P 54 "All code deployed on a blockchain comes with a guarantee of
> execution, by engaging with a Plantoid, people are contractually bound to,
> and cannot deviate from the rules stipulated into the underlying smart
> contract code."
> Building a Plantoid is done by humans, of course they can deviate ... and
> if not, they are stupid to participate and become slaves... (maybe there is
> something I don't understand here)
>
> P.55 "The Plantoid continuously monitors its Bitcoin balance and whenever
> it realizes, that a particular threshold has been reached, the Plantoid
> will be able to use this money to initiate it's own reproduction"
> A Plantoid has no conscience as far as I know, so I don't think it can
> realize something - It's  calculation and rules that trigger an action - a
> Plantoid isn't living. Being made of code and rules is not the same as
> having a soul.
>
> p 58 " Indeed, the DNA of every Plantoid, that is, all the logic and rules
> that govern its growth and reproduction are recorded on the Ethereum
> blockchain. These may include certain distinctive aesthetic or physical
> requirements . that will affect the scope of creativity and the room
> for discretion left to the artists commissioned to produce the next
> Plantoid."
> So Plantoid seems to be conservative, reinforcing the characteristics it
> started with.
>
> Artists will have to make propositions for the next level Plantoid within
> the rules and logic on the blockchain. Contributors can vote the for these
> by sending micro-transactions to the Bitcoin blockchain of their choice.
> All will be weighted by the amouths contributed and the smartcontract will
> process it and establish a winner.
> Grr, automatised decissions Gr anything can come out of such a
> thing Gr, no discussion, the winner is not necessary what is wished for
> ...
>
> P 59 " the reproduction process, the evolution of Plantoids follow a
> Darwinist approach" 
> Does it? Darwinism changed a lot over time.
> The essential concept of "mutation" (for evolution) doesn't seem to have a
> place in the Plantoid blockchain project. Mutation would mean a change of
> code, an intervention in the basic rules and logic of the blockchain and
> that seems to be impossible  Adaption to the environment is not the
> same as mutation!
>
> p60 "Each Plantoid is forever and inextricably connected to both its
> ancestors and its descendants, with whom it can communicate through a
> shared blockchain-based network."
> I vigorously disagree with the use of the word "communicate" here. Even if
> it's use could be correct, it is misleading because of our day to day use
> of the word. The block-chain based network exists for us to see, to
> conceptualise, but a Plantoid can not communicate inside it. Plantoids are
> part of a chain, network of rules and logic, they don't exchange inside it.
> Information is linked, coupled, that's all.
>
> GRRR
> winners and so losers, determined by calculation only
> conservative
> not living at all
> GRRR
>
> That's what I understood
>
> Best
> Annie
>
>
> --
> *The Laboratory of Networked Behavior* Article by Randall Packer :
> randallpacker.com/the-laboratory-of-networked-behavior/
>
> ___
> 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
>



-- 

*Qu'est-ce et pourquoi agency art ?* 12/10 18h Conférence, festival Mèq
*, *hTh,
Montpellier.

#PEAE = #Participatory #ethology in #artificial environments #ethnological

[NetBehaviour] REMINDER: Open call for failed e-textile work and projects; samples, prototypes and tests.

[Piksel Infobot]

Reminder:

Open call for failed e-textile work and projects; samples, prototypes
and tests @ PIKSEL17

Deadline october 1.

http://trials-and-errors.com/call


Sorry for cross posting-


Within the realm of electronic and smart textiles there have been
promising technological investigations that never quite managed to
reach their potential. However, despite these disappointments,
industrial and academic research, as well as artistic inquiry, continue
to explore the possibilities of electronic and smart textiles.

Our investigation seeks to understand the various stages of the
development of the field, exploring the paths of how and why they
occurred, as well as when they did.

Every development has its price. Failure has always been part of the
creative process, as a learning experience. In many fields, recording
glitches and keeping a catalogue of failures are part of the research
process. These benchmarks are not always in the spotlight, but taking a
look at the process itself says a lot about artists, designers,
technologists thought processes. Test-benches are a form of thinking
through and with the materials, a form of playing around, of advancing
by small steps.

But failures and trials have their drive not only in the technical
constraints. In the age of “fast prototyping,” “publish or perish” and
“start-up competitions,” our project is also an attempt to reflect on
the present technological boom and innovation obsolescence, encouraging
an ecological perspective which will take into consideration the whole
cycle of conception, consumption, ageing, and degradation of
technology. By doing so, this project wants to put a new light on
technically overstepped products and failed prototypes, rejected
wearables and e-textiles projects, and to launch a debate about the
“fast” design and scientific practices that define our present.

As an interdisciplinary field, electronic textiles and wearables are
also the ground for a series of interdisciplinary clashes between
textiles and electronics, between software and hardware, between open
source and commercial platforms. These clashes are producing inspiring
work, but some encounters are also the source of frustration and
irritation.

This collection of attempts, failures, trials and errors it is not
intended to praise the failures, nor to minimize the successes of
wearables and e-textiles. By questioning the idea of failure and
success, the project will put emphasis on art’s capacity to critically
and, at the same time, poetically and self-ironically, address
contemporary challenges and concerns.

In a sort of forensic processes and significance tests, this project
calls for technical trials and errors, failed prototypes, and rejected
art and design works in order to put into a new light the potential of
e-textiles and wearables. Our intention is to show the richness of the
processes, of what has been already done in the electronic and smart
textiles domain and to bring into the discussions ethical, ecological
and sustainability issues of wearables and e-textiles. The focus will
be on the distance between ideals and constraints, between concepts and
realization.

-- 

Piksel17
November 16-18 2017
Bergen, Norway

- -



Hei Gisle,


Vi har litt lite respons på callen vår, og nå er det bare fem dager igjen.
Tror du du kan sende ut en reminder på piksel-lista?





Reminder: 
Open call for failed e-textile work and projects; samples, prototypes and tests.
Deadline october 1.
http://trials-and-errors.com/call


Sorry for cross posting-


Within the realm of electronic and smart textiles there have been promising technological investigations that never quite managed
 to reach their potential. However, despite these disappointments, industrial and academic research, as well as artistic inquiry, continue to explore the possibilities of electronic and smart textiles.

Our investigation seeks to understand the various stages of the development of the field, exploring the paths of how and why they occurred, as well as when they did.

Every development has its price. Failure has always been part of the creative process, as a learning experience. In many fields, recording glitches and keeping a catalogue
 of failures are part of the research process. These benchmarks are not always in the spotlight, but taking a look at the process itself says a lot about artists, designers, technologists thought processes. Test-benches are a form of thinking through and with
 the materials, a form of playing around, of advancing by small steps.

But failures and trials have their drive not only in the technical constraints. In the age of “fast prototyping,” “publish or perish” and “start-up competitions,” our
 project is also an attempt to reflect on the present technological boom and innovation obsolescence, encouraging an ecological perspective which will take into consideration the whole cycle of conception, consumption, ageing, and degradation of technology.
 By doing 

Re: [NetBehaviour] I hate blockchain plantoids by O’Khaos - that's probably why they are great

[AG Forever]

annie is this letter somewhere online ?
i have a few blockchain folllowers on twitter like to send them

hugs

sound & curation
AGF: @poemproducer / .com
sound wave : antyegreie.com



> On 25 Sep 2017, at 19:07, Annie Abrahams  wrote:
> 
> This email is there to try to pen down some of my very visceral negative 
> reactions to Plantoid - The Birth of a Blockchain-Based Lifeform (p 51 -61)in 
> Artists Re:thinking the Blockchain 
> https://liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/products/100826
> 
> Let me first say that Plantoid is a great project, because it makes some 
> implications of the Blockchain technology very evident and poses a lot of 
> questions.
> 
> P 54 "All code deployed on a blockchain comes with a guarantee of execution, 
> by engaging with a Plantoid, people are contractually bound to, and cannot 
> deviate from the rules stipulated into the underlying smart contract code."
> Building a Plantoid is done by humans, of course they can deviate ... and if 
> not, they are stupid to participate and become slaves... (maybe there is 
> something I don't understand here)
> 
> P.55 "The Plantoid continuously monitors its Bitcoin balance and whenever it 
> realizes, that a particular threshold has been reached, the Plantoid will be 
> able to use this money to initiate it's own reproduction"
> A Plantoid has no conscience as far as I know, so I don't think it can 
> realize something - It's  calculation and rules that trigger an action - a 
> Plantoid isn't living. Being made of code and rules is not the same as having 
> a soul.
> 
> p 58 " Indeed, the DNA of every Plantoid, that is, all the logic and rules 
> that govern its growth and reproduction are recorded on the Ethereum 
> blockchain. These may include certain distinctive aesthetic or physical 
> requirements . that will affect the scope of creativity and the room for 
> discretion left to the artists commissioned to produce the next Plantoid."
> So Plantoid seems to be conservative, reinforcing the characteristics it 
> started with.
> 
> Artists will have to make propositions for the next level Plantoid within the 
> rules and logic on the blockchain. Contributors can vote the for these by 
> sending micro-transactions to the Bitcoin blockchain of their choice. All 
> will be weighted by the amouths contributed and the smartcontract will 
> process it and establish a winner. 
> Grr, automatised decissions Gr anything can come out of such a thing 
> Gr, no discussion, the winner is not necessary what is wished for ...
> 
> P 59 " the reproduction process, the evolution of Plantoids follow a 
> Darwinist approach" 
> Does it? Darwinism changed a lot over time. 
> The essential concept of "mutation" (for evolution) doesn't seem to have a 
> place in the Plantoid blockchain project. Mutation would mean a change of 
> code, an intervention in the basic rules and logic of the blockchain and that 
> seems to be impossible  Adaption to the environment is not the same as 
> mutation!
> 
> p60 "Each Plantoid is forever and inextricably connected to both its 
> ancestors and its descendants, with whom it can communicate through a shared 
> blockchain-based network."
> I vigorously disagree with the use of the word "communicate" here. Even if 
> it's use could be correct, it is misleading because of our day to day use of 
> the word. The block-chain based network exists for us to see, to 
> conceptualise, but a Plantoid can not communicate inside it. Plantoids are 
> part of a chain, network of rules and logic, they don't exchange inside it. 
> Information is linked, coupled, that's all. 
> 
> GRRR
> winners and so losers, determined by calculation only
> conservative
> not living at all
> GRRR
> 
> That's what I understood
> 
> Best
> Annie
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Laboratory of Networked Behavior Article by Randall Packer :
> randallpacker.com/the-laboratory-of-networked-behavior/
> ___
> 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