joseph mcelroy
Since 2002
Works in New York United States of America

ARTBASE (1)
PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
The McElroys are a husband and wife collaborative artist, technology, and business team who bring significant artistic, technology and community development skills to Corporate Performance Artists. Joseph, is a graduate of Computer Science from Duke University and a former team leader at IBM. He has been a CEO of several companies, and has been responsible for raising $2 million to fund a startup company called EveryDayPrint.com, which while part of the dot-com boom and bust, he managed to bring to profitability and which still survives to this day.

Donna was an operations manager and PR specialist in the firms they have started together. She has recently been credited by several business leaders in the Bronx as being "top spokesperson for the Bronx." She is active in many community development projects, such as participating on the Board of the Bruckner Arts and Antique District, and working to promote many Bronx activities through an online newsletter called Cupcake Kaleidoscope.

Joseph was the leader of the Open Source Sig for the New York Software Industry Association. And was track co-chair for Open Source at the 2001 New York Software Industry Summit. He was on the advisory board for PostgreSql, Inc - the leading Open Source Database and has had articles published by Lutris Technologies and Open Magazine on Open Source business models and technology solutions. He is a database expert with extensive Fortune 500 experience. Among other awards, he won an IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.

From magazine "Open" issue September 2001 - "The McElroys kick open the doors of old business models and capitalize on what they believe." The McElroys have achieved re-known as Open Source visionaries with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine, and others. Joseph and Donna make no claims of divine insight, but in review by Lewis Lacock, it is said, "that this dynamic duo of art are the closest things we have to true shamans today". They are doing their best to pursue the knowledge to support such claims someday.

HIGHLIGHTS

* Achieved reputation as Open Source visionarys with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine among others.
* National Columnist on Money Matters for Gather.com.
* Judge for the Advanced Technical Categories of the Emmys.
* Successfully raised $2 million funding for startup.
* Successfully built and sold two technology businesses.
* First Entry into the Multimedia wing of the Museum of Computer Art.
* Artwork collected by the Library at Cornell University.
* Artwork in the collection of Rhizome.org.
* Developed first ever Exhibition Catalog completely on CD Rom. Done for Alternative Museum. Reviewed by New York Times.
* Selected to attend first ever Summer Institute for Performance Art at The Kitchen in NYC.
* IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
* Various academic, mathematic and scholarship awards. Attended Duke University on a full scholarship in mathematics.
* Poetry published in various journals. Art exhibited in museum shows.
* Certificate of Artistic Excellence from Congressman Jose Serrano.
* Recognized by Bronx Borough President Aldofo Carrion for contributions to the community.
Discussions (635) Opportunities (0) Events (3) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Fw: Sept 29 Technology Hearing - NYC Council


*********PUBLIC HEARING*********
On Monday, September 29, at 10:00 a.m., the Select Committee on Technology =
in Government will hold a hearing on the convening of the Commission on Pub=
lic Information and Communication (COPIC). Added to the City Charter in 19=
89, the primary purpose of this Commission is assist the public - from jour=
nalists, researchers and the average citizen - in obtaining and understandi=
ng information produced or maintained by the City, that is, "public informa=
tion."

Of particular interest to the Committee will be how the Commission could im=
prove the Freedom of Information Law or FOIL process to make it easier for =
journalists, researchers and the average citizen to get information from th=
e City. We also will explore how technology could be used to release and d=
istribute more "public information" in a wider array of formats - while at =
the same time, maintaining the privacy of all individuals.

Expected to testify are Betsy Gotbaum, the Public Advocate for the City of =
New York; Bob Freeman, Executive Director, New York State's Committee on Op=
en Government; Gene Russianoff, Senior Attorney, NYPIRG; as well as represe=
ntatives from the City's Department of Information Technology and Telecommu=
nications, Community Board members from Queens and Brooklyn and the former =
Executive Director of COPIC, Maria Teresa Rojas, now with George Soros' Ope=
n Society Institute.

a.. Time: 10:00 am to 1:00 pm
b.. Date: Monday, September 29, 2003
c.. Location: 250 Broadway, 14th floor Hearing Room

Topic: "Making Public Information Accessible: Convening the Commission on=
Public Information and Communication

DISCUSSION

Re: FW: DIGITAL MUSEUM OF MODERN ART LAUNCHES IN CYBERSPACE


Ayn Rand in outer space.

joseph the barbarian

joseph and donna
www.electrichands.com

Quoting feisal ahmad <feisal@rhizome.org>:

>
> ----------
> From: <press@dmoma.org>
> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:32:26 -0400
> To: feisal@rhizome.org
> Subject: DIGITAL MUSEUM OF MODERN ART LAUNCHES IN CYBERSPACE
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> August 27, 2003
>
> Contact: W. Logan Fry
> Press Office
> press@dmoma.org / Wloganfry@aol.com
> DMOMA - http://www.dmoma.org
>
> DIGITAL MUSEUM OF MODERN ART LAUNCHES IN CYBERSPACE
>
> The Digital Museum of Modern Art opened its portals to the public July 31,
> 2003.
> It can be accessed from anywhere in the world - from a catfish farm in the
> outfields of Cleveland a high rise apartment in Kuala Lampur. Anytime, day
> or
> night: "Art Never Sleeps".
>
> Go to: http://www.dmoma.org
>
> DMOMA is dedicated to new forms of visual expression, as well as adaptation
> of
> old techniques and processes to new purposes. The immediate focus is digital
> art,
> including art in digital format, physical art made by digital process, and
> art in
> every media and format that speaks to the advancing technologies of our era.
>
> DMOMA tests the underlying premise: << All art can be reduced to a sequence
> of
> binary bits. . . zeros and ones in endless succession. >>
>
> Not only art, but architecture, can manifest itself solely as binary bits,
> and
> exist solely in cyberspace. To paraphrase Nicholas Negroponte in "Being
> Digital":
>
> << As we go online and deliver more and more bits and fewer and fewer atoms,
> the
> leverage of maintaining a physical museum will disappear. Even having a
> dedicated
> staff of officers, curators and preparators will lose some its significance
> as as
> the museum becomes an electronic venue brought directly into your office,
> home
> and classroom. >>
>
> And into space DMOMA will go also, with DMOMA Deimos scheduled to open in
> June,
> 2004.
>
> The paradigm shift is upon us.
>
> Artists are invited to submit their art, under the precepts of the Viridian
> Green
> Manifesto, for possible inclusion in the museum collection; or to send
> proposals
> for special exhibitions. Go to: www.dmoma.org.
>
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

DISCUSSION

I have no time


Ground-breaking work in understanding of time
Mechanics, Zeno and Hawking undergo revision

A bold paper which has highly impressed some of the world's top physicists and
been published in the August issue of Foundations of Physics Letters, seems set
to change the way we think about the nature of time and its relationship to
motion and classical and quantum mechanics. Much to the science world's
astonishment, the work also appears to provide solutions to Zeno of Elea's
famous motion paradoxes, almost 2500 years after they were originally conceived
by the ancient Greek philosopher. In doing so, its unlikely author, who
originally attended university for just 6 months, is drawing comparisons to
Albert Einstein and beginning to field enquiries from some of the world's
leading science media. This is contrast to being sniggered at by local
physicists when he originally approached them with the work, and once aware it
had been accepted for publication, one informing the journal of the author's
lack of formal qualification in an attempt to have them reject it.

In the paper, "Time and Classical and Quantum Mechanics: Indeterminacy vs.
Discontinuity", Peter Lynds, a 27 year old broadcasting school tutor from
Wellington, New Zealand, establishes that there is a necessary trade off of all
precisely determined physical values at a time, for their continuity through
time, and in doing so, appears to throw age old assumptions about determined
instantaneous physical magnitude and time on their heads. A number of other
outstanding issues to do with time in physics are also addressed, including
cosmology and an argument against the theory of Imaginary time by British
theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking.

"Author's work resembles Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity", said a
referee of the paper, while Andrei Khrennikov, Prof. of Applied Mathematics at
Vaxjo University in Sweden and Director of ICMM, said, "I find this paper very
interesting and important to clarify some fundamental aspects of classical and
quantum physical formalisms. I think that the author of the paper did a very
important investigation of the role of continuity of time in the standard
physical models of dynamical processes." He then invited Lynds to take part in
an international conference on the foundations of quantum theory in Sweden.

Another impressed with the work is Princeton physics great, and collaborator of
both Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman, John Wheeler, who said he admired
Lynds' "boldness", while noting that it had often been individuals Lynds' age
that "had pushed the frontiers of physics forward in the past."

In contrast, an earlier referee had a different opinion of the controversial
paper. "I have only read the first two sections as it is clear that the
author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic
analysis and calculus. I'm afraid I am unwilling to waste any time reading
further, and recommend terminal rejection."

Lynds' solution to the Achilles and the tortoise paradox, submitted to
Philosophy of Science, helped explain the work. A tortoise challenges Achilles,
the swift Greek warrior, to a race, gets a 10m head start, and says Achilles
can never pass him. When Achilles has run 10m, the tortoise has moved a further
metre. When Achilles has covered that metre, the tortoise has moved 10cm...and
so on. It is impossible for Achilles to pass him. The paradox is that in
reality, Achilles would easily do so. A similar paradox, called the Dichotomy,
stipulates that you can never reach your goal, as in order to get there, you
must firstly travel half of the distance. But once you've done that, you must
still traverse half the remaining distance, and half again, and so on. What's
more, you can't even get started, as to travel a certain distance, you must
firstly travel half of that distance, and so on.

According to both ancient and present day physics, objects in motion have
determined relative positions. Indeed, the physics of motion from Zeno to
Newton and through to today take this assumption as given. Lynds says that the
paradoxes arose because people assumed wrongly that objects in motion had
determined positions at any instant in time, thus freezing the bodies motion
static at that instant and enabling the impossible situation of the paradoxes
to be derived. "There's no such thing as an instant in time or present moment
in nature. It's something entirely subjective that we project onto the world
around us. That is, it's the outcome of brain function and consciousness."

Rather than the historical mathematical proof provided in the 19th century of
summing an infinite series of numbers to provide a finite whole, or in the case
of another paradox called the Arrow, usually thought to be solved through
functional mathematics and Weierstrass' "at-at" theory, Lynds' solution to all
of the paradoxes lay in the realisation of the absence of an instant in time
underlying a bodies motion and that its position was constantly changing over
time and never determined. He comments, "With some thought it should become
clear that no matter how small the time interval, or how slowly an object moves
during that interval, it is still in motion and it's position is constantly
changing, so it can't have a determined relative position at any time, whether
during a interval, however small, or at an instant. Indeed, if it did, it
couldn't be in motion."

Lynds also points out that in all cases a time value represents an interval on
time, rather than an instant. "For example, if two separate events are measured
to take place at either 1 hour or 10.00 seconds, these two values indicate the
events occurred during the time intervals of 1 and 1.99999...hours and 10.00
and 10.0099999...seconds respectively." Consequently there is no precise moment
where a moving object is at a particular point. From this he is able to produce
a fairly straightforward resolution of the Arrow paradox, and more elaborate
ones for the others based on the same reasoning. A prominent Oxford
mathematician commented, "It's as astonishing, as it is unexpected, but he's
right."

On the paradoxes Lynds said, "I guess one might infer that we've been a bit
slow on the uptake, considering it's taken us so long to reach these
conclusions. I don't think that's the case though. Rather that, in respect to
an instant in time, I don't think it's surprising considering the obvious
difficulty of seeing through something that you actually see and think with.
Moreover, that with his deceivingly profound paradoxes, I think Zeno of Elea
was a true visionary, and in a sense, 2500 years ahead of his time."

According to Lynds, through the derivation of the rest of physics, the absence
of an instant in time and determined relative position, and consequently also
velocity, necessarily means the absence of all other precisely determined
physical magnitudes and values at a time, including space and time itself. He
comments, "Naturally the parameter and boundary of their respective position
and magnitude are naturally determinable up to the limits of possible
measurement as stated by the general quantum hypothesis and Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle, but this indeterminacy in precise value is not a
consequence of quantum uncertainty. What this illustrates is that in relation
to indeterminacy in precise physical magnitude, the micro and macroscopic are
inextricably linked, both being a part of the same parcel, rather than just a
case of the former underlying and contributing to the latter."

Addressing the age old question of the reality of time, Lynds says the absence
of an instant in time underlying a dynamical physical process also illustrates
that there is no such thing as a physical progression or flow of time, as
without a continuous progression through definite instants over an extended
interval, there can be no progression. "This may seem somewhat counter-
intuitive, but it's exactly what's required by nature to enable time (relative
interval as indicated by a clock), motion and the continuity of a physical
process to be possible." Intuition also seems to suggest that if there were not
a physical progression of time, the entire universe would be frozen motionless
at an instant, as though stuck on pause on a motion screen. But Lynds points
out, "If the universe were frozen static at such an instant, this would be a
precise static instant of time - time would be a physical quantity."
Consequently Lynds says that it's due to natures very exclusion of a time as a
fundamental physical quantity, that time as it is measured in physics, or
relative interval, and as such, motion and physical continuity are possible in
the first instance.

On the paper's cosmology content, Lynds says that it doesn't appear necessary
for time to emerge or congeal out of the quantum foam and highly contorted
space-time geometrys present preceding Planck scale just after the big bang, as
has sometimes been hypothesized. "Continuity would be present and naturally
inherent in practically all initial quantum states and configurations, rather
than a specific few, or special one, regardless of how microscopic the scale."

Lynds continues that the cosmological proposal of imaginary time also isn't
compatible with a consistent physical description, both as a consequence of
this, and secondly, "because it's the relative order of events that's relevant,
not the direction of time itself, as time doesn't go in any direction."
Consequently it's meaningless for the order of a sequence of events to be
imaginary, or at right angles, relative to another sequence of events. When
approached about Lynds' arguments against his theory, Hawking failed to
respond.

When asked how he had found academia and the challenge of following his ideas
through, Lynds said it had been a struggle and that he'd sometimes found it
extremely frustrating. "The work is somewhat unlikely, and that hasn't done me
any favours. If someone has been aware of it, my seeming lack of qualification
has sometimes been a hurdle too. I think quite a few physicists and
philosophers have difficulty getting their heads around the topic of time
properly as well. I'm not a big fan of quite a few aspects of academia, but I'd
like to think that whats happened with the work is a good example of
perseverance and a few other things eventually winning through. It's reassuring
to know that happens."

Lynds said he had initially had discussions with Wellington mathematical
physicist Chris Grigson. Prof. Grigson, now retired, said he remembered Lynds
as determined. "I must say I thought the idea was hard to understand. He is
theorising in an area that most people think is settled. Most people believe
there are a succession of moments and that objects in motion have determined
positions." Although Lynds remembers being frustrated with Grigson, and once
standing at a blackboard explaining how simple it was and telling him to "hurry
up and get it", Lynds says that, unlike some others, Prof. Grigson was still
encouraging and would always make time to talk to him, even taking him into the
staff cafeteria so they could continue talking physics. Like another now
retired initial contact, the Australian philosopher of Science and
internationally respected authority on time, Jack Smart, who would write
Lynds "long thoughtful letters", they have since become friends, and Prof.
Grigson follows Lynds' progress with great interest. "Academia needs more Chris
Grigsons and Jack Smarts", said Lynds.

Although still controversial, judging by the response it has already received
from some of science's leading lights, Lynds' work seems likely to establish
him as a groundbreaking figure in respect to increasing our understanding of
time in physics. It also seems likely to make his surname instantly associable
with Zeno's paradoxes and their remarkably improbable solution almost 2500
years later.

Lynds' plans for the near future the publication of a paper on Zeno's paradoxes
by themselves in the journal Philosophy of Science, and a paper relating time
to consciousness. He also plans to explore his work further in connection to
quantum mechanics and is hopeful others will do the same.

###

joseph the barbarian

joseph and donna
www.electrichands.com

DISCUSSION

Open Source Collaborative Art Process


Open Source Collaborative Art Process structured along Open Source lessons
described by Eric S. Raymond in his landmark essay 'The Cathedral and the
Bazaar.

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Death Bets


I am not living in a Monty Python Movie. I state again, I am not living in a
Monty Python Movie. I bash rabbits.

joseph the barbarian

joseph and donna
www.electrichands.com

Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <eryk@maine.rr.com>:

>
> It's interesting, it's like if people are upset at me, it raises Joseph from
> the Dead to remind everyone that he, too, is upset at me.
>
> Check the archive, Joseph: I never said anything about the "appropriateness"
> of "satirical content."
>
> -e.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "joseph the barbarian" <joseph@electrichands.com>
> To: "Eryk Salvaggio" <eryk@maine.rr.com>; <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Death Bets
>
>
> > Why do scientists and artists look alike? In a proper world, I could just
> bash
> > all their brains in. Makes me wonder, who gave authority to whom? They
> should
> > just rename the movie to Full Metal Glasses. Are we all Jokers Born to
> Kill?
> >
> >
> > Eryk... last I heard you were not qualified to judge the appropriateness
> of
> > satiric content.
> >
> >
> > joseph the barbarian
> >
> > joseph and donna
> > www.electrichands.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <eryk@maine.rr.com>:
> >
> > >
> > > Here's my thinking Mr. M River,
> > >
> > > It strikes me that this project of DARPA's was so ridiculous that we are
> > > addressing it as satire, when it isn't, it's the actual thing; this is
> > > certainly laughable to a degree- as I said, the surreality of it is so
> > > absurd that to a degree it's funny. And I am not discounting that, but I
> do
> > > think that there is another side to it- there are infinite number of
> sides
> > > to it- and the reality of that project is all the while significantly
> morbid
> > > and disturbing, and I don't know if we can afford to laugh about it 100%
> > > when there are some very disturbing and morbid underlying themes to it,
> in
> > > so much as how the government operates and in what the project reveals,
> as a
> > > bright and bold affirmation of a military-industrial-terrorist complex.
> I'll
> > > even deal with 75% laughing at it and 25% serious consideration, but no
> > > less. I think a project like this deserves some degree of critical
> thought,
> > > so I decided to inject some into the discussion.
> > >
> > > I don't believe in mutual exclusives; I am laughing with you and at it
> and
> > > also thinking about what it means in a broader scope.
> > >
> > > -e.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "M. River" <mriver102@yahoo.com>
> > > To: <list@rhizome.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 3:22 PM
> > > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Death Bets
> > >
> > >
> > > > Eryk Salvaggio wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What are your criteria: The most number of people slaughtered, or
> the
> > > > > subtlety of how it's accomplished?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dear Eryk, My Friendster friend,
> > > >
> > > > Sometimes, Dr. Strangelove is a better social critic than Apocalypse
> Now.
> > > >
> > > > > keep treating it as something other than what it is does not get us
> > > > > anywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, for me it does. Darpa created the proto-internet and the
> work we
> > > make stands on that foundation. It is nessary, every once in awhile, to
> look
> > > at the larger landscape that we are in and define ourselves in relation.
> To
> > > change Darpa's context from "gov r&d" to "artist" is an exercise for
> that
> > > goal. I know that you are not taking this all literally, but in some
> ways
> > > you are.
> > > >
> > > > > While you might think of this as "beautiful," I find it
> > > > > horrifying that there is not even a *desire* in human beings to see
> > > > > these elements seperated from us.
> > > >
> > > > I guess that brings the larger question when thinking about
> Technology.
> > > What is our culpability?
> > > >
> > > > (ps. thanks for jpeg)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > > > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > > +
> > > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > > >
> > >
> > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>
>