yasir~
Since the beginning
Works in Karachi Pakistan

Discussions (139) Opportunities (0) Events (1) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

plato on: google / towards sublime


[some thoughts from yesterday; also links up with thread:
RHIZOME\_RAW: when Google has achieved the net art masterpiece, what are
the artists to do? especially comment about sublime]

I just re-opened Plato
This is a very Platonic existence of ideas, this internet

Unlike as someone was mentioning a week ago:
Pythagorean, and the spheres and harmonies:
Basically number mysticism belief powers magic.
[in such thinking]
the thinker of the thought is completely apparently
dissociated-separated from the thought, his own thought!
There you have it: British analytical philosophy and life.
The fallacy of believing and doing, that there is logic to the passage/s
of time or the flow/s of life/ves.
[Natalie merchant: you

DISCUSSION

Re: when Google has achieved the net art masterpiece, what are the artists to do?


Hi t.whid,
I find your comments very interesting and intriguing:
Thanks, the zeitgeist page was great. here are some observations and
links to some contexts, may be even explanations of some things.

You said:
(1) i know, i know, it's not the entire world, but it seems to me that
the sample is large enough that searches wouldn't change much if you
added EVERYONE to the mix.

> I'd say, don't be fascinated by the data. It is a tiny tiny amount of
the diversity of data that exists on this planet. And diverse doesn't
mean just non-white, it means not just one country but one in 235 (or
whatever number of countries in the world) With thiyusands of languages,
and millions of kinds of people under combinations of places,
Conditions, climates, continents....(think of any thing).. the world
is actually very very ... very big. And disconnected also. Not just
physically but mentally culturally.

The data might be good for [marketing strategies for the same population
that uses the internet, but just what is

the number/proportion of people on the planet who
have access to the internet : those who do NOT have access to a
telephone?
Proportion 1:109
Numbers44 million : 3600 million (people)
for non-high income countries[, (world dev report 98-99, world bank)

You are absolutely right when you say: ....Or perhaps lots more
USAians use Google.

I'm inclined to say that the data itself will be close to what you have
on the [mainstream media], because, the internet reflects the [presence]
of the dominant ideas, the mass/the averaged acceptable ideas, for mass
consumption, which constitute the heavy hegemony of the mainstream, that
is US media. As you can see on the google/zeitgeist page
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html, the entries are mostly
brands, or what's in the news or what season it is [in the US, UK],
rather than something more [a lttle meaningful, even a tiny bit?] so,
its not zeitgeist that's there at all, because that's at a deeper level:
this is just mainstream-mass-media, making its rounds in peoples heads,
and making them act in a somewhat predictable way, if they decide to
look up the very same thing that was hot on tv.

The data is still deeply facscinating, you can see whole waves going up
and down, if you look at last year's Year-End Google Zeitgeist
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist2001.html. This becomes amply clear
from the timeline for 2001 http://www.google.com/press/timeline.html

The world media, including local forms is there, but the US model is
supreme and becoming stranger when adopted locally, or commented on by
its audiences worldwide. It works because there isn't enough innovation,
creativity in the media. Its yet to become truly inclusive, which is
much more than just democratic. A local paper over the past 2 years has
started bringing out about 20 different types of supplements a week up,
from about 3-5, but I have to say, no, still a long long way to go.

Googles data might be big in volume compared to others, but still I can
organize it. Its not chaotic. It has distinctly easily discernable
patterns.

So art has plenty of capital in the Bank of Diversity, plus its
value-added ness is incomparable, although some of it has been valued
[!] or even overvalued over time [!]. I mean just empirically look at
[who advises these people] in how to [value] things: the institutions!

When you say:
i feel that we've strayed to far into their world in some areas; we
can't compete when it comes to the 'awe' factor.

I think I would strongly disagree with this despite the impression that
the technology leaves. Science and technology are overvalued in this.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] On Behalf
Of t.whid
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 9:25 PM
To: list@rhizome.org
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: when Google has achieved the net art masterpiece,
what are the artists to do?

preface: this little text started out very casually, then grew a bit
organically. i attempted to polish, but i'm not a great writer. it now
seems to be uncomfortably sitting somewhere btw tossed off email and a
serious attempt at commentary.

Subject: when Google has achieved the net art masterpiece, what are the
artists to do?
++

reading this story in the nytimes recently:

"Postcards From Planet Google"
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/28/technology/circuits/28goog.html

from the article:
"AT Google's squat headquarters off Route 101, visitors sit in the
lobby, transfixed by the words scrolling by on the wall behind the
receptionist's desk: animaciOn japonese Harry Potter pensEes et poEmes
associaUCo brasileira de normas tEcnicas.

The projected display, called Live Query, shows updated samples of what
people around the world are typing into Google's search engine. The
terms scroll by in English, Chinese, Spanish, Swedish, Japanese,
Korean, French, Dutch, Italian - any of the 86 languages that Google
tracks.

Stare at Live Query long enough, and you feel that you are watching the
collective consciousness of the world stream by. "

this article, like many tech-related articles i read, got me thinking
about the two worlds in which many of us on this list exist: the worlds
of art and technology. how they're different. how they're the same. how
are their functions evolving?

in a world where a technology company can display 'the collective
consciousness of the world'(1) as a backdrop to their reception desk,
essentially a marketing ploy for their services; when they can collect
this data, sit on it and ruminate on how to 'monetize' it; when it
takes a fully capitalized, profit-driven corporation employing some of
the brightest engineers around to achieve such fascinating data then
what is left for the artist to do?

it used to be that it was the artist's job to capture the 'collective
consciousness' either through intuition, genius, or dumb-luck. the
artists were the ones who told humans what humans were thinking about,
obsessing over, loving, hating. we no longer need intuition, genius or
even dumb-luck. we've got hard data and more is coming in every
millisecond.

thinking about google's Live QueryT (check out google's zeitgeist for a
taste: http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html (2)) i start to
imagine what an artist might do with the information. especially if the
artist could get the info in a realtime stream. but, then, i think
about most of the data visualization projects i've seen (Carnivore
clients as an example) and they don't do all that much for me. they are
simply formal exercises which, though are interesting in their
random-seeming behavior, don't have a visual richness to command my awe
(a limitation of screens and projectors) and don't possess a depth
conceptually to make me go, 'aaahh'.

what could an artist add to the GoogleT Live QueryT? How could one make
it any more sublime than it is? the artist could add nothing. when the
data-set ITSELF is so conceptually fascinating there is no more to do.
any sort of visualization would simply be distraction. simply KNOWING
that the data is flowing in and stored on some magnetic media somewhere
is enough for me. it's fun to see it stream-in i suppose, but the
knowledge of it's creation and archival is much more than fun; it's
sublime.

Google has achieved the net art masterpiece. there has not been
anything created in net art that comes close to it and i don't foresee
anything coming from the arts that could rival it. the arts are
underfunded. the arts don't have access to the same resources. the
technologists will always win in this game of art and tech. i feel that
we've strayed to far into their world in some areas; we can't compete
when it comes to the 'awe' factor. sure, we can 'comment', 'criticize',
and 'tweak,' but it mostly comes out thin compared to our market
cousins: the Googles, the Ids, the Pixars, the Rockstar Games. we
simply don't have the tech that they play with and will always be
behind in that area; we can't compete FORMALLY with the commercial
side. though our projects my be much deeper conceptually, the form or
aesthetic allows people to step into the work, if it doesn't stack up
against the commercial counterpart, it's easy for the audience to
ignore it.

To be precise, there are a few areas where artists are going to be
hard-pressed to compete. Those areas are 3D gaming, 'virtual' worlds
and 3D animation; and realtime data visualization and manipulation.

The worlds created in the Sims, Grand Theft Auto, Toy Story, Quake and
etc are complex and exciting in ways which their artworld counterparts
can't match up. They are larger, easier to navigate, more exciting to
interact with, have more sophisticated visuals, are more entertaining,
and are surprising in their level of freedom to interact (the audience
has more options). And why shouldn't they be more interesting? They've
got large teams of developers working on them, they can test the
interaction in focus groups and have almost unlimited pools of capital
to draw from. What individual artist could compete with that?

in realtime data collection and manipulation, IMO, the strength of the
work comes from the intriguing data. the visual representations of this
data should help us comprehend interesting data. if the data isn't
interesting, neither is the piece no matter how interesting the visuals
may be. Research firms, search engines, polling companies create
interesting and therefor very valuable data to the market. There will
always be a technological advantage fueled by capital to the market
technologists as opposed to the artists. They have the capital to put
together interesting data in ways that artists can't compete with.

One area where the artists and the industry can compete head-to-head is
in *web art*(3), this is an area where artists are ahead of industry,
IMO. Web *presentation* technologies (CSS, XHTML, DHTML Flash,
Director, etc) are more readily available so this makes sense. It's an
area where artists are able to achieve technological parity. It's also
the area that is the most similar to traditional art practice; it lends
itself to the individual creator working with limited means.

So what should be done? More funding for the arts is one answer.
Collectives of pooled technology and economic resources would be a
great way to go. Korean immigrants in NYC join credit clubs where
everyone pays into a central pool and they can then receive loans to
start businesses. This model could work for artists working in
technology.

it will be very hard to compete it some of these areas however. if
there is no pay-off in the end, capitalists won't put money behind
projects. public funding is almost non-existent, subject to it's own
opaque rules, and wouldn't be enough to achieve technological parity in
any case.

+++
(1) i know, i know, it's not the entire world, but it seems to me that
the sample is large enough that searches wouldn't change much if you
added EVERYONE to the mix.

(2 ) Looking over the google zeitgeist makes one a bit sick by it's
heavy tilt toward USAian pop cultural obsessions. They may be filtering
the data for this page to suit western viewers. Or perhaps lots more
USAians use Google.

(3) I make this distinction btw net art and web art: net art needs to
use a network as an integral part of the medium. if one takes the
network out of the piece, the piece ceases to function either literally
or conceptually. web art simply uses the web for distribution (ie one
can run it without a network connection and it works fine), is
presented through a browser (most of the time), and/or uses web
technologies (HTML, Flash etc).

--
<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>
+ the internet is not your life.
-> 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

Male Circumcision is


It's not the circumcision that's the problem >it's the absolute
suspense> [

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] On Behalf
Of josh zeidner
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 2:59 AM
To: Charlie NYC
Cc: list@rhizome.org
Subject: Re: FW: RHIZOME_RAW: Male Circumcision is Wrong

--- Charlie NYC <charlienyc@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> i understand what you are saying, josh. but, no one
> said victorians
> created circumcision.

Something I find humorous is that a lot of feminist
thinking presents the Victorian age as the founder of
this highly oppressive legacy, but paradoxically, the
Victorian age characterizes itself as having *female
leadership*.

> we said it became popular
> non-religiously and
> with christians to stop masturbation and then touted
> as a health
> issue to justify it for future generations after the
> "masturbation is
> the root of all evil" thing went out of style.
>
> yes, the feminist thing is a stretch, a common
> strategy used by
> leftists to unite other groups under their power
> field. it is true
> though that a mother naturally does not want to cut
> her newborn and
> hear his screams. it is also true that the baby has
> no choice in the
> matter and in that is it technically "forced genital
> mutilation".
> whether or not it affects a woman's enjoyment of sex
> is up in the air
> as far as i am concerned. i would need a LARGE well
> spread survey.

Well the ends do not justify the means. If you
believe in this argument( 'circumcision is wrong' )
then it should hold its own so to speak without
needing various rhetorical contortions. This just
adds to the misinformation, creates more problems,
people die, babies cry, etc.

>
> the idea that it can cause social problems like rape
> and violence is
> probably bullshit used by anti-circumcision people
> to scare their
> opponents. i highly doubt this. instead i think our
> war-mentality in
> america is a separate problem. we have NO IDEA what
> happens in the
> psychology of a newborn though i will guess that the
> extreme pain as
> a very early sensation in the genitals HAS to have
> some effect and i
> will also guess it is a trauma of some sort. a baby,
> taken from his
> mother's arms to have one of the most sensitive
> areas of his body cut
> by a stranger, come on. you think this is a good
> idea?

Well I would honestly say no. Such an operation
should probably not be manditory. As was mentioned
this does have a religious precedence. Also
circumcision is practiced in cultures that have not
been infected with the 'judeo-christian
snake-in-the-grass' such as Australian Aboriginies.

>
> your comments on eastern enlightenment and india's
> no-sex-before-marriage culture was connected how?
> sexual politics?

You could put it this way: often times to justify a
position certain parties try to create an alternate
reality that they present as a better option to the
one we currently have. Mythologizing about
hypothetical asian cultures does not help anybody.
What it does is takes fragments of cultures that are
misunderstood and presents them as the whole, a
sociological frankenstein monster. This kind of
argument is VERY common today and is rooted in our
conceptions of race and cultural identity and so
forth.

>
> this is what i think. i think we had some major
> problems with sex
> because of illegitimate children and STDs running
> rampant through us
> at MANY points in our past so we evolved culturally
> to solve this
> problem by creating strict culture about monogamy
> and marriage to
> close the sexual network and protect us. now, we
> have 1) antibiotics,
> 2) condoms, and 3) abortion.

Do we( as in ALL of us ) consider these things as
options? At least one of these things, antibiotics,
is beginning to be seen by science as
counter-productive. Do we want to become dependent on
technologies rather than moral codes?

As you know the abortion issue is still largely
unresolved. Abortion has a long history of
persecution. Midwives were often associated with
witchcraft, etc. The problematic issue of abortion is
not a new one, and its not likely to go away anytime
soon.

> therefore, we do not
> need AS MUCH these
> fears of sex and extreme focus on monogamy as we
> once did. yes, our
> sexual fears helped us survive once by slowing
> horrible plagues like
> syphilis and by creating greater stability in child
> raising by
> strengthening he family structure and fatherhood.
> that is why these
> fears are here. we are the successful offspring of
> survivors of STD
> plagues; both physically and culturally we adapted.
> and, usually, the
> family structure has, over-all, increased our chance
> of surviving by
> the father protects the wife protects the child
> system. this is also
> physical and cultural as almost everything is. now,
> we have a choice.

> do we want to still be uncomfortable with our bodies
> and sex?

What does that mean? I really cannot interpret this
statement.

> i think
> for raising children, the father should be known and
> be a part of it.

You have drawn a picture of 'traditional culture'
and shown how we have obviated it due to current
technological development. How do you see these
'traditional cultures' as not involving the father in
child rearing? If anything absentee fathers are a
manifestation of recent cultural changes rather than
these reported vestiges of the past.

> but before we are ready to have children, why all
> this monogamy crap?
> whatever, that is my opinion.

Psychology has shown that the sexual act has a
profound effect on the psyche. So called 'mental
illnesses' seem to be utterly ubiquitous today( which
is yet another multi-billion dollar industry ). What
is the solution? Jerk off?( btw- in most 'asian'
cultures this is considered even to this day to be a
function of insanity ). The link between sexual
behaviour and a mental outlook has been shown
countless times by modern psychology.

>
> but this is off topic. the main thing about the male
> circumcision
> issue for me is the lack of choice on the part of
> the child.

Ok, but if you want an argument to be taken
seriously, you do not throw in everthing and anything
from your system of beliefs( as discussed above ).

> i am
> vegan and it is the same issue for me: a stronger
> force physically
> controlling the life of another. yes, we RAISE our
> children but we
> should OWN them.
>
> oh, and why not post this debate online:
> http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/11/1545248.php

be my guest...

-josh

>
> ~Charlie
>
> >----------
> > > From: josh zeidner <jjzeidner@yahoo.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 08:07:41 -0800 (PST)
> >> To: doron golan <doron@computerfinearts.com>
> >> Cc: list@rhizome.org
> >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Male Circumcision is
> Wrong
> >>
> >> "Recently Mr. Dervin gave a teach-in for the
> Feminist
> >> Majority Leadership Alliance at San Francisco
> State
> >> University entitled, "Why Male Circumcision is a
> >> Feminist Issue," essentially focusing this
> teach-in on
> >> the numerous ways in which male circumcision
> affects
> >> women including, but not limited to:breaking of
> the
> >> mother-infant bond; overriding the new mother's
> basic
> > > instinct to protect her child from harm;
> disrupting
> >> breast-feeding; lessening overall sexual
> enjoyment of
> >> women; increasing the "female sexual
> dysfunctions" of
> >> vaginal dryness and pain during intercourse; as
> well
> >> as likely increasing rates of rape and domestic
> >> violence."
> >>
> >> This argument is pure fallacy( :) ).
> >>
> >> Whether or not male circumcision is right or not
> >> remains an issue, however:
> >>
> >> 1) Male circumcision is NOT a feminist issue.
> >> According to people of this character EVERTHING
> is a
> >> feminist issue. Circumcision is not the cause
> of
> >> domestic violence and rape. I am sick of people
> >> turning thier personal psychological problems
> into
> >> social programs, because unfortunately in places
> like
> >> the US, this has become accepted.
> >>
> >> 2) Circumcision has a long history, predating
> the
> >> Victorian era. Although this article is yet
> another
> >> fine example of commentary designed to villify
> the
> >> evil white male, circumcision as a practice is
> not at
> >> all limited to European culture. It is
> estimated
> >> that the majority of ancient Egyptians were
> >> circumcised, and this is likely the place where
> it was
> > > picked up by the western Judaeo-Christian-Islam
> >> tradition( it is also believed that Egyptians
> did not
> >> circumcise at birth, but rather at puberty ).
> >> Circumcision has been practiced since the
> beginnings
> >> of civilization.
> >>
> >> 3) The idea that sexual behaviour must be
> somehow
> >> 'liberated' has become practically inextricable
> from
> >> so called modern progressive political and
> >> philosophical movements( and these ideas can be
> traced
> >> to Freud and associates ). I see sentiments
> like the
> >> ones above as a good example of such thinking.
> What I
> >> find interesting AND CONTRADICTORY is:
> >>
> >> a) They see problems like AIDS and STD( the AIDS
> >> rate continues to rise, it is estimated that 1
> in 5
> >> people between 20-30 have HERPES) as a HEALTH
> problem
> >> rather than a social problem. I believe that
> this
> >> mental construction is likely to be supported by
> the
> >> wonderful american medical community for reasons
> that
>
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
+ the internet is not your life.
-> 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

RE: [thingist] Democracy by Design .fwd


Breaking breaking news !

Asterix
And
Obelix
From
Gaul
Have
Arrived
[?&!]
,
and
this
is
no
democracy
by
crook
or
by
design
it
is
a
terrorist
situation
panic!
Panic!

Wait.
There's
Hope.
[ ]

Here's
Thierrible !!!

C'mon Thierry
Help!

[should I say it]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-thingist@bbs.thing.net [mailto:owner-thingist@bbs.thing.net]
On Behalf Of Roberto Cabot
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 8:39 PM
To: thingist@bbs.thing.net
Subject: Re: [thingist] Democracy by Design .fwd

breaking news!

french horde hijacks NY list!

no demand is yet known, situation is chaotic.
aparently, the hijackers talk in code and what they say does not make
any sens...

poil au schnemze

r

Am 28.11.2002 16:13:25, schrieb "bobig" <bobig@bobig.com>:

>==> heureusement que vous etes la pour parler franchouse et ramener le
debat
>a mon niveau. je comprends nibe a ce qu'ils disent. sont vachement
intellos
>sur cette liste !
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "clement Thomas" <ctgr@free.fr>
>To: <thingist@bbs.thing.net>
>Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 1:16 PM
>Subject: Re: [thingist] Democracy by Design .fwd
>
>
>> c'est difficile avec les baguettes
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "hoord'hur" <hoordhur@yahoo.fr>
>> To: <thingist@bbs.thing.net>; <h3o-o3h@www.god-emil.dk>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 1:07 PM
>> Subject: Re: [thingist] Democracy by Design .fwd
>>
>>
>> > > whishood day,
>> >
>> > bon tous ces trouduc d'americains sont en train de
>> > bouffer dla dinde, clement tiens moi tribe que je
>> > l'encule a la moutarde de dijon. preumz
>> >
>> > ___________________________________________________________
>> > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en francais !
>> > Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
>> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > t h i n g i s t
>> > message by "hoord'hur " <hoordhur@yahoo.fr>
>> > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
>> > info: send email to majordomo@bbs.thing.net
>> > and write "info thingist" in the message body
>> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> t h i n g i s t
>> message by "clement Thomas" <ctgr@free.fr>
>> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
>> info: send email to majordomo@bbs.thing.net
>> and write "info thingist" in the message body
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>t h i n g i s t
>message by "bobig" <bobig@bobig.com>
>archive at http://bbs.thing.net
>info: send email to majordomo@bbs.thing.net
>and write "info thingist" in the message body
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
t h i n g i s t
message by Roberto Cabot <roberto@mediamorphose.org>
archive at http://bbs.thing.net
info: send email to majordomo@bbs.thing.net
and write "info thingist" in the message body
--------------------------------------------------------------------

DISCUSSION

The Pentagons's house philosopher


The Pentagons's house philosopher

http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=2851

In the conduct of war, ideas matter. Ironically, the superficial and bad
ones may matter even more than the good ones. Historically, political
leaders may have relied on Sun Tsu